Final Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. T. PRIYADARSHINI
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-RENT CONTROLLER, EAST,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
SUIT No.:- 134/2024
CNR No.:- DLET03-000204-2024
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Sunil Kumar S/o Sh. Duli Chand
R/o C-61/A &62, Second floor-4,
Gate No. 02, Vinayank Apartment,
Ganesh Nagar, Delhi.
....Plaintiff
Versus
Anuradha w/o Mr. Amit Kumar
R/o H. No. 208, Hussainpura,
Near Jansath Block, Jansath,
Muzzafar Nagar, UP-249408 ….......Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 2,34,174/- (RUPEES TWO LAKHS
THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SEVENTY FOUR
ONLY)
Date of Institution: 17.02.2024
Date on which Judgment was reserved: 04.03.2025
Date of Judgment: 23.04.2025
JUDGMENT
CASE AS PER PLAINT
1. The plaintiff and defendant are well known to each other since
last long time and were having friendly relations. In February 2020,
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
1 of 6
-- 1 of 6 --
defendant and her husband approached the plaintiff and requested for
Rs. 2,30,000/- as friendly loan. When the plaintiff communicated that
he did not have such a substantial amount to give as a loan, the
defendant and her husband requested that loan be given in smaller
amounts in monthly instalments and they undertook that the loan will
be repaid within 2 years or from the date of the last monthly
instalment received from the plaintiff. After much persuasion by the
defendant and her husband, the plaintiff transferred money from his
SBI and Axis banks account through electronic mode from 10.02.2020
into the bank account of the defendant. After expiry of stipulated time
period, plaintiff approached the defendant and demanded his money,
however, defendant expressed her inability to pay the same and sought
15-20 days’ time, however, even after expiry of said period, she did
not return the amount. In the month of July 2022, defendant issued
two cheques bearing no. 051029 and 051030 dated 11.07.2022 of Rs.
50,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- respectively drawn at Oriental Bank of
Commerce, Janpath District, Muzzafar Nagar-249408 in favour of the
plaintiff towards part payment of Rs. 2,34,174 owed by the defendant
in favour of the plaintiff. After getting consent from the defendant,
when plaintiff presenting the aforesaid cheques to his banker, the bank
officials returned the said cheques to him stating that Oriental Bank of
Commerce is merged with Punjab National Bank so that new cheque
is required. Plaintiff informed the same to the defendant. On which,
defendant assured the plaintiff that she will make him payment
shortly, however, despite considerable time period, the defendant did
not repay the loan.
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
2 of 6
-- 2 of 6 --
2. Aggrieved by the conduct of the defendant, plaintiff sent a legal
notice dated 25.01.2024 to the defendant. Despite service, the
defendant did not repay the loan amount. Hence, the present recovery
suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for a sum of
Rs.2,34,174/- along with bank interest @ 8% per month till the date of
realization of the payment.
PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
3. Summons of the suit was issued to the defendant and the same
was served by way of WhatsApp. However, neither the defendant
appeared nor written statement filed. Accordingly, the defendant was
proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 09.07.2024.
PLAINTIFF’S EVIDENCE
4. In order to prove the case of the plaintiff, plaintiff stepped into
the witness box as PW1 and filed his evidence by way of affidavit
which was exhibited as Ex.PW1/A wherein he reiterated and
reaffirmed the contents of the plaint. PW-1 also relied upon the
following documents:-
a) Copy of bank statements of Axis Bank for account no.
917020050669412 from 19.12.2019 to 29.07.2020
Ex.PW1/1 (consisting 7 pages)
b) Copy of bank statements of SBI account no. 66005226161
from 01.04.2021 to 31.03.2022 Ex.PW1/2 (consisting 69
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
3 of 6
-- 3 of 6 --
pages)
c) Copy of bank statements of SBI account no. 66005226161
Mark A (consisting three pages).
d) Cheque bearing no. 051029 Ex.PW1/4.
e) Cheque bearing no. 051030 Ex.PW1/5.
f) Legal demand notice dated 25.01.2024 Ex.PW1/6.
g) Original speed post receipt Ex.PW1/7.
h) Tracking report of speed Mark B.
i) Copy of Aadhar Card of plaintiff Ex.PW1/8 (OSR).
j) Certificate u/s 65 B of IE Act Ex.PW1/9.
5. The plaintiff’s evidence was concluded on 25.01.2025 vide
separate statement of plaintiff. On 04.03.2025, final arguments were
advanced by the Ld. counsel for the plaintiff. Case file has been
perused. Submissions made have been heard. My findings and
observations on facts in issue are delineated hereinafter.
FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
6. The defendant has not filed written statement to contest the suit
of the plaintiff. As stated earlier, the defendant was proceeded ex-
parte. Once the defendant does not file the written statement, then the
case of the plaintiff is deemed to be admitted and the suit could have
been decreed by taking recourse to Order VIII Rules 5 and 10 of CPC
as facts not specifically denied are taken to be admitted and need not
be proved.
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
4 of 6
-- 4 of 6 --
7. The copies of banks account statements of defendant and
plaintiff and original cheques (Ex.PW1/4 and Ex.PW1/5) are on
record. The aforesaid documents have been duly proved and they
indicate the various loan amounts which were credited to the bank
account of the defendant and defendant’s husband. The suit is filed
within the prescribed period of limitation. The cause of action arose
within the territory of East District, Delhi. This court has both the
territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain this suit. There is
nothing on record to contradict or disprove the case of the plaintiff.
The case of the plaintiff has gone unchallenged and unrebutted. There
is no reason to disbelieve the version of the plaintiff which is duly
supported by documents.
8. The testimony of PW-1 has remained unrebutted and
uncontroverted. Moreover, the case of the plaintiff is based on and is
substantiated by documentary evidence. In view of the unrebutted and
uncontroverted evidence adduced by the plaintiff, the Court holds that
it has been successful in substantiating its case against the defendant
and the plaintiff is held entitled to recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,34,174/-.
9. The plaintiff has also sought bank interest @ 8% per month till
the date of realization of payment. However, the said rate is excessive
and penal in nature. A reasonable interest @10% per annum is
imposed on the defendant. Accordingly, in view of the above said
discussion, the present suit is disposed in favour of the plaintiff and
against the defendant for uncontested sum of Rs. 2,34,174/- along with
interest @ 10% per annum till the date of realization of the payment.
The cost of the suit and legal expenses are also awarded against the
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
5 of 6
-- 5 of 6 --
defendant, as per rules.
RELIEF
10. A decree for sum of Rs. 2,34,174/- is passed in favour of the
plaintiff and against the defendant along with interest @ 10% per
annum from the date of filing of suit till the date of realization of the
same. The cost of the suit is also awarded against the defendant, as per
rules. Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly, subject to payment of
requisite court fees. File be consigned to Record Room after due
compliance.
Announced in open court
on this 23rd April, 2025
T. Priyadarshini
Senior Civil Judge-cum-RC (East)
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
This judgment consists of 6 pages and each and every page of this
judgment is signed by me.
CS No: 134/2024
Sunil Kumar vs. Anuradha
6 of 6
-- 6 of 6 --