CIMB BANK BERHAD vs RODWIN V BAHADUR

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 MarsdenLR 1246

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CIMB BANK BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
RODWIN V BAHADUR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Jagjit Kaur,Tengku Nazihah Hanis ,Respondent Advocate: Rajendra Navaratnam,Joel Low

Table of Content
1. plaintiff's claim for outstanding loan amount. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 9)
2. court's observations on evidence and burden of proof. (Para 3 , 12 , 19 , 21)
3. defendant's arguments against the loan agreement. (Para 10 , 11)
4. court's reasoning on public policy and penalty interest. (Para 37 , 39 , 60)

Liza Chan Sow Keng J:

Introduction

[1] In this action, the Plaintiff (interchangeably "the bank") sought to recover from the Defendant (interchangeably "the borrower") an alleged outstanding sum of RM1,266,551.17 as at 25 December 2019; Interest at the rate of 7.85% [which is1.00% above the Bank's Base Lending Rate (the Bank's Current Base Lending Rate is 6.85% and is reviewed from time to time)] calculated from 26 December 2019 until the date of full settlement; and costs on a solicitors-client basis and full indemnity pursuant to a Facility for the sum RM3,600,000.00 ("the Facility") granted to the Defendant.

[2] During trial lasting 4 days, the bank called 2 witnesses to adduce evidence ie PW1 (Lim Chew Liang), PW2 (Tan Lay Juan) whilst the Defendant ("DW1") gave evidence as well as called DW2, Datuk Tan Kwe Hee in support of the defence.

[3] I had on 13 April 2023

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 MarsdenLR 1246

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPURCIMB BANK BERHAD – AppellantVersusRODWIN V BAHADUR – Respondent

Cases Referred (6)

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CIMB BANK BERHAD – Appellant
Versus
RODWIN V BAHADUR – Respondent