Final Order 14

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SH. SUNIL KHATRI, CIVIL JUDGE-06,
CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
CS SCJ No. 2166/2023
CNR No. DLCT03-006357-2023
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Pawan Mittal
Sole Proprietor of Mittal Sarees
At: Shop No.5855, Jogiwada,
Nai Sarak, New Delhi-110006 ........ Plaintiff
Versus
Sh. Mohd. Imran
Owner Of Karishma Saree Emporium,
At: Sadar Bazar, Gurugram,
Haryana-122001 ........ Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.1,08,171/-.
Date of Institution : 04.11.2023
Date of Reserving for Judgment : 20.12.2025
Date of Judgment : 20.12.2025
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1. The present suit has been filed for decree of payment
of Rs.1,08,171/- in favour of the plaintiff and against the
defendant with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of filing
till its realization.
2. Brief facts of the present case as called out from the
plaint are as follows:-
CS SCJ No. 2166/2023 Pawan Mittal Vs. Mohd. Imran Pg. no. 1/4
-- 1 of 4 --
2.1 It is submitted that the plaintiff is the wholesale dealer
of Lehngas, Lanchas, Sarees etc. and the defendant also deals in
the same business as a retailer at the above mentioned address.
2.2 It is further submitted that the defendant approached
the plaintiff to buy various products from the plaintiff. The
defendant had purchased various products for Rs.1,31,323 from
the plaintiff vide Invoice No.1445 dated 24.03.2022, Invoice No.
1555 dated 27.04.2022 and Invoice No. 1601 dated 13.05.2022.
2.3 It is further submitted that defendant made a part
payment of Rs.23,152/- leaving behind a balance of Rs.1,08,171.
2.4 It is further submitted that the defendant after
receiving the above mentioned goods refused to pay the plaintiff
the remaining balance of Rs. 1,08,171/-. On repeated requests
telephonic made by the plaintiff, the defendant refused to the
admitted liability on one pretext or another. In spite of repeated
demands made telephonically by the plaintiff, the defendant has
failed and neglected to make the aforesaid payment.
2.5 Lastly, it is submitted that since the payment is long
overdue and as per trade, customs and usage of the defendant is
also liable to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the
date of each transaction till its actual realization.
3. Summons of the suit were served upon the defendant
through Whatsapp on 30.08.2024. However, no WS was filed on
behalf of the defendant and hence right to file WS of defendant
was closed and due to non appearance of the defendant, he was
CS SCJ No. 2166/2023 Pawan Mittal Vs. Mohd. Imran Pg. no. 2/4
-- 2 of 4 --
proceeded ex-parte on 29.01.2023.
4. The ex-parte evidence was led by the plaintiff. In his
evidence, plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and filed his
evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW-1/A and tendered following
documents in his evidence.
i. Ex. PW-1/1 (OSR) is bill/invoice no. 1445 dated
24.03.2022.
ii. Ex. PW-1/2 (OSR) is bill/invoice no. 1555 dated
27.04.2022.
iii. Ex. PW1/3 (OSR) is bill/invoice no. 1601 dated
13.05.2022.
iv. Ex. PW1/4 is legal notice dated 14.03.2023.
v. Ex. PW1/5 (colly) is original postal receipt and proof
of delivery.
5. Thereafter, plaintiff closed the ex-parte evidence vide
separate statement given in this regard on 01.04.2025.
6. I have heard the arguments of the Ld. Counsel of the
plaintiff and perused the record.
7. The plaintiff has duly proved the factum of supply of
goods to the defendant vide invoices/bills Ex. PW1/1 (OSR) to
Ex. PW1/3 (OSR). Legal notice Ex. PW1/4 alongwith postal
receipt and proof of delivery Ex. PW1/5 (colly) further fortifies
the case of the plaintiff that defendant has failed to make the
payment to the plaintiff despite repeated reminder and notice. The
averments made by the plaintiff stand duly proved by way of
documents filed with the suit. Hence, plaintiff has duly
CS SCJ No. 2166/2023 Pawan Mittal Vs. Mohd. Imran Pg. no. 3/4
-- 3 of 4 --
discharged his burden of proof under Section 104 of the Bhartiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It was for the defendant to dispute
that no amount was due towards the plaintiff or the amount due
was already paid, however, defendant has failed to enter
appearance. Since defendant was proceeded ex-parte and no
evidence was led by it despite service of summons, there is
nothing on record which casts any doubt on the case of plaintiff.
The case of plaintiff has gone unchallenged and unrebutted.
Accordingly, plaintiff has successfully proved its case on the
scale of balance of probabilities.
8. In view of above discussion, the suit of the plaintiff is
hereby decreed and it is held that plaintiff is entitled to decree for
recovery of amount of Rs.1,08,171/- against the defendant,
alongwith pendente-lite and future interest @ 18% per annum.
Cost of the suit is also awarded in favour of the plaintiff.
10. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
11. File be consigned to record room after due
compliance.
Pronounced in the court
on 20.12.2025
(SUNIL KHATRI)
Civil Judge-06/Central
Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi
Present judgment consists of 04 pages and each page is signed by
me.
(SUNIL KHATRI)
Civil Judge-06/Central
Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi
CS SCJ No. 2166/2023 Pawan Mittal Vs. Mohd. Imran Pg. no. 4/4
-- 4 of 4 --