Balachandran Naidu v Baba Products M Sdn Bhd

This matter concerned an application by Balachandran Naidu (the applicant) to set aside a default judgment entered against him in favour of Baba Products M Sdn Bhd (the respondent). The dispute arose from a loan agreement, and the applicant sought to have the default judgment, which had been entered on 15 March 2023, vacated on the grounds that he had a meritorious defence to the claim and that the default judgment was irregular. The application was heard by Justice Rowena Beal of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the applicant had established a meritorious defence to the respondent's claim, and whether the default judgment had been irregularly obtained. The applicant contended that he had a defence based on the loan agreement being void for illegality, as it was allegedly entered into for an unlawful purpose. Furthermore, the applicant argued that the default judgment was irregular because the respondent had failed to comply with certain procedural requirements in seeking its entry.

Justice Beal considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the loan agreement and the circumstances surrounding its formation. The Court applied the principles governing applications to set aside default judgments, which require the applicant to demonstrate both a meritorious defence and that the judgment was irregularly obtained or that there was sufficient reason to set it aside. The Court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of illegality that would render the loan agreement void. Consequently, the Court concluded that the applicant had failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence. Regarding the alleged irregularity, the Court found no basis for the applicant's claims.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the applicant's application to set aside the default judgment.