Final Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SH. VIVEK BENIWAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM-RENT CONTROLLER, EAST,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI.
CS No.355/2025
CNR NO. DLET03-000505-2025
In the matter of :-
Sh. Faheem Ahmed
S/o Sh. Gulam Rabbani,
R/o H. No. 4/454, Trilok Puri,
Delhi-110091
…….. Plaintiff
Versus
Sh. Dinesh Kumar
C/o Dubey & Sons (Regn.)
R/o H. No. 1/10-11, Block No. 1
Trilok Puri, Delhi
.........Defendant
SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR RECOVERY OF Rs.20,000/-
Date of Institution : 08.05.2025
Date of judgment: : 09.12.2025
JUDGMENT
CASE AS PER PLAINT
1. The plaintiff is well acquainted with defendant and his family
members for a long period as both are the resident of same locality.
Defendant had approached plaintiff in month of December 2022 and
requested him to give Rs.20,000/- for a very short period. As plaintiff
CS No. 355/2025
Faheem Ahmad vs. Dinesh Kumar
Page No. 1 of 4
-- 1 of 4 --
and defendant were known to each other and considering friendly
terms, the plaintiff gave Rs.20,000/- in cash on 05.01.2023 to
defendant and defendant assured plaintiff that he would return the
amount at the end of February 2023. After completion of said agreed
period, on repeated requests, defendant had issued a cheque bearing
no. 463987 amounting to Rs.20,000/- dated 21.04.2023 drawn on
Punjab National Bank, Branch at Trilok Puri in favor of plaintiff and
ensured him that cheque would be encashed on its presentation.
2. Thereafter, plaintiff presented the said cheque in his bank for
encashment, but the cheque was dishonored thrice with the remark
“Funds Insufficient” vide returning memos dated 25.04.2023,
06.05.2023 & 28.06.2023 . After that the plaintiff informed defendant
regarding dishonor of cheque and demanded money upon which the
defendant sought some more time to to arrange funds and requested
not to take any legal action. Defendant failed to pay the said amount
and since January 2024 defendant started avoiding the plaintiff and
used to abuse and talk in a very inappropriate manner with plaintiff.
3. Thereafter, plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 23.10.2024
through speed post which was served to defendant on 24.10.2024.
Despite receipt of said notice, the defendant failed to make the
payment of the said amount. In this background, the present suit for a
sum of Rs.20,000/- has been filed.
PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS
4. Summons of the suit were issued to the Defendants. Summons
to Defendant were received back duly served on 10.06.2025.
However, defendant neither appeared nor filed WS, accordingly,
defendant was proceeded ex-parte on 30.07.2025.
CS No. 355/2025
Faheem Ahmad vs. Dinesh Kumar
Page No. 2 of 4
-- 2 of 4 --
PLAINTIFF’S EVIDENCE
5. In order to prove the case of the Plaintiff, Plaintiff stepped into
the witness box as PW1 and filed his ex-parte 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) Photocopy of Aadhar Card of the deponent which is Ex.
PW-1/1 (OSR).
b) Original cheque bearing no. 463987 of Rs.20,000/- dated
21.04.2023 which is Ex.PW-1/2.
c) Original returning memos (3 in nos.) dated 25.04.2023,
06.05.2023 & 28.06.2023 of the said cheque which are
Ex.PW-1/3 (Colly).
d) Legal Notice dated 23.10.2024 which is Ex.PW-1/4.
e) Postal receipt which is Ex.PW-1/5.
f) Internet tracking report which is marked as Mark A.
6. The Plaintiff’s evidence was concluded on 15.10.2025 vide
separate statement of Plaintiff. Case file has been perused.
Submissions made have been heard. My findings and observations on
facts in issue are delineated hereinafter.
FINDINGS & CONCLUSION
7. 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. 355/2025
Faheem Ahmad vs. Dinesh Kumar
Page No. 3 of 4
-- 3 of 4 --
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
the present suit is disposed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant for uncontested sum of Rs.20,000/-. The Plaintiff has
claimed interest @ 18% per annum. However, the interest rate is on
the higher side. Therefore, reasonable interest @ 10% per annum is
granted from filing of the suit till the date of realization of
Rs.20,000/-.
RELIEF
9. A decree for a sum of Rs.20,000/- along with interest @ 10%
per annum from the date of institution of suit till the final realization
of the amount is passed in favour of the Plaintiff and against the
Defendant. The cost of the suit is also awarded against the Defendant,
as per Rules. Decree-sheet be prepared accordingly. Deficient court
fees, if any, be deposited at the time of filing of execution petition.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in open court
on this 9th December, 2025
Vivek Beniwal
Senior Civil Judge-cum-RC (East)
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
This judgment consists of 4 pages and each and every page of this
judgment is signed by me.
CS No. 355/2025
Faheem Ahmad vs. Dinesh Kumar
Page No. 4 of 4
-- 4 of 4 --