Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 20
CS SCJ 146/25
Sudhir Tiwari Vs. Raj Bahadur Saroj
17.08.2026
Present: Mr. Sanchit Sehgal, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff. (through VC)
Ms. Bhavika Kohli, Ld. Counsel for defendant. (through VC)
Matter is listed for arguments and disposal of the application under Order
VII Rule 11 CPC filed by the defendant. Despite various opportunities, no reply has been
filed on behalf of plaintiff and the application is pending since quite some time.
Accordingly, arguments have been heard on the application and it is being
disposed off as follows.
The applicant/defendant has argued that plaint reveals no cause of action as
only an amount of Rs.30,000/- was advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant through UPI
and Rs.20,000/- was given in cash. However, defendant denies receipt of any cash amount
and alleges that the entire Rs.30,000/- has been repaid to the plaintiff. It is further alleged
that this court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the
present suit as the Aadhaar Card filed by the plaintiff shows that he is not residing within
the territorial jurisdiction of this court and there is no document to show that he is living at
the address stated in the memo of parties.
Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has opposed the application by arguing that the
plaint does disclose a proper cause of action and the plaintiff is residing at the address as
stated in the memo of parties at rent alongwith his brother.
Record has been perused.
It is trite that for the purpose of the application filed under Order VII Rule
11 CPC, court is not required to go beyond the pleadings and documents filed alongwith
the plaint. At this juncture, court cannot consider the documents filed by the defendant to
render an opinion as to whether there is any cause of action or not. Furthermore, mere
-- 1 of 3 --
absence of any document evidencing cash transaction would not amount to lack of cause
of action and the plaintiff should be given liberty to prove the same during the trial.
Furthermore, the absence of territorial jurisdiction, if any, is not a ground for rejection of
the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC and the plaintiff may prove during the trial that he
was residing within the jurisdiction of this court when the transaction took place. Needless
to say, if the plaintiff fails to prove that, the plaint may be returned under Order VII Rule 10
CPC.
Accordingly, in the opinion of this court, no grounds for rejection of the
plaint is made out as the plaint does reveal a cause of action.
Application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC is hereby dismissed and disposed
off accordingly.
Now the application filed by the defendant seeking condonation of delay in
filing the WS, is taken up for adjudication. However, it is noticed that such application is
not accompanied with any affidavit of the defendant and is rather accompanied with the
affidavit of Ld. Counsel for defendant, which is against the practice and procedure
prescribed under CPC.
Defendant is directed to file his own affidavit in support of his application
within two weeks from today with advance copy to the opposite side.
It is being noticed that the only document relied upon by the plaintiff in the
plaint is a copy/computer print-out of bank account statement, allegedly reflecting the
payment of Rs.30,000/- made through UPI to the defendant. Bare perusal of such
document shows that the only relevant transaction of Rs.30,000/- in such document is not
legible, the account number as well as the period of account statement is not also visible
and so much so, that the name of the account holder is also not visible.
In these circumstances, for such careless and callous attitude of plaintiff, he
is burdened with a cost of Rs.5000/- to be deposited in the A/c of District & Sessions
Courts Employees Welfare Association Delhi detailed as under:-
SBI Account No. 38222714058
-- 2 of 3 --
IFSC : SBIN0000726
Branch: Tis Hazari
Receipt of the same be filed before NDOH.
Be adjourned for completion of pleadings and framing of issues for
28.10.2026.
Plaintiff is directed to supply copy of certificate filed under Section 63 of
Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, to the other side against proper
acknowledgment/receiving.
(Bharat Aggarwal)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ (North)
Rohini Courts, Delhi
17.08.2026
-- 3 of 3 --