Final Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF SHRI MAYANK MITTAL
SCJ-CUM-RC, NORTH -WEST DISTRICT,
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
Suit No.547/2025
CNR No. DLNW03-000772-2025
In the matter of :
Sh. Ravinder Viswakarma
Office At :
E-58A, Shiv Vihar Karala,
Karala, North West,
Delhi-110081 ......Plaintiff
Versus
Sh. Vikas Rai
R/o A-24, Jain Nagar, North,
New Delhi-110081
Working at:
Dr. Baba Sahab Ambedkar Hospital
Sector-6, Rohini, Delhi-110085
......Defendant
Date of institution : 07.05.2025
Reserved for Judgment : 08.01.2026
Date of decision : 12.01.2026
SUIT FOR RECOVERY
JUDGMENT (EX-PARTE)
1. This is a suit for recovery of Rs.14,940/- (Rupees Fourteen
Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Only) along with pendent
elite and future interest @ 18% from the date of filing of suit till
realization along with cost.
CS SCJ No. 547/2025 Ravinder Viswakarma v. Vikas Rai Page No. 1 of 5
-- 1 of 5 --
2. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiff as averred in the
plaint are that the plaintiff is a bike mechanic at sector 3, Rohini,
Delhi-110085 and he had a family relationship with the
defendant. The defendant borrowed 15,500 from the plaintiff in	₹
November 2023, stating that it was due to an emergency and
promised to return the money within a month. Trusting the
defendant's statement, the plaintiff transferred 15,500 to the	₹
defendant via UPI. After many reminders, defendant transferred
Rs. 2,500/- to the plaintiff via UPI in May 2024. Plaintiff’s bank
statement of the defendant showed the outstanding balance of Rs.
13,000/- without the interest. Even plaintiff's repeated request,
defendant has not paid the above said entire amount and made
many pretext not to pay his liability. Plaintiff sent a legal notice
dated 28.08.2024 to the defendant about the same and asking him
to immediately clear the outstanding dues. Hence, the present
suit.
3. The defendant was served with the summons of the suit
through affixation on 16.06.2025. However, the defendant failed
to file WS within stipulated time and never appeared in no. of
dates, therefore, was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated
17.11.2025 and the plaintiff was directed to bring ex-parte
evidence.
4. The plaintiff examined himself as PW1 who in his
evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A has reiterated and
reaffirmed the averments made in the plaint. He has relied upon
the following documents :
CS SCJ No. 547/2025 Ravinder Viswakarma v. Vikas Rai Page No. 2 of 5
-- 2 of 5 --
(a) Copy of the Aadhar card is Ex.PW1/1 (OSR);
(b) Copy of the Bank Statement is Ex.PW1/2;
(c) Copy of the legal notice dated 28.08.2024 is Ex.PW1/3.
5. I have heard the plaintiff and perused the material available
on record carefully.
6. Before giving findings on the evidence led by plaintiff and
submissions advanced on behalf of plaintiff, it is important to
note that in the present case, the defendant has never appeared in
no. of dates and was proceeded ex parte vide order dated
17.11.2025. It is further noted that the Court is mindful of the
fact that in cases where the defendant is ex-parte, the Court needs
to be extra cautious, as it would not have the advantage of
defence pointing out the defect in the case of plaintiff and before
passing the judgment, the pleadings and evidence of the plaintiff
should be weighed carefully before arriving at the finding as to
whether the plaintiff has made out a case for a decree. The initial
burden to prove the averments of the plaintiff rests entirely upon
the plaintiff who has to discharge the said burden as per law. In
civil litigation, it is sufficient for the plaintiff to prove its case by
preponderance of probabilities. In Adiveppa V. Bhimappa
(2017) 9 SCC 586, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has
observed that:
“It is a settled principle of law that the initial burden is always
on the plaintiff to prove his case by proper pleadings and
adequate evidence (oral and documentary) in support thereof.”
CS SCJ No. 547/2025 Ravinder Viswakarma v. Vikas Rai Page No. 3 of 5
-- 3 of 5 --
Thus, the burden to prove the case as per law entirely is
upon the plaintiff, by way of documentary and oral evidence.
7. PW-1 has proved on oath the allegations against the
defendant and the evidence produced by the plaintiff goes on
unchallenged and un-rebutted. Copy of the Aadhar card is
Ex.PW1/1 (OSR); Copy of the Bank Statement is Ex.PW1/2;
Copy of the legal notice dated 28.08.2024 is Ex.PW1/3.
8. The present suit is filed within the prescribed period of
limitation as per provisions of Limitation Act and the present suit
has been instituted on 07.05.2025, hence the present suit is
within limitation. As defendant has not turned up despite service
and accordingly was proceeded ex-parte, the averments made in
the plaint and the testimony of the plaintiff during PE remained
unrebutted. There is no reason to disbelief the unrebutted
testimony of PW1 and the documents relied upon him. These
documents coupled with testimony of the plaintiff prove the case
of the plaintiff.
Relief
9. In view of the reasons given above and uncontroverted
evidence brought on record, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed
and followings reliefs are granted in his favour and against the
defendant:-
i. Decree for a sum of Rs.13,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Thousand
CS SCJ No. 547/2025 Ravinder Viswakarma v. Vikas Rai Page No. 4 of 5
-- 4 of 5 --
Only).
ii. Seeing the prevalent market conditions, pendent elite and
future interest at the rate of Rs.9% per annum is also awarded in
favour of the plaintiff from 01.06.2024 (the date when the
payment become due) till the realization of the amount.
iii. Cost of the suit.
10. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to
Record Room after due compliance.
Announced in the Open Court
on 12.01.2026
(Mayank Mittal)
Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller,
North West District : Rohini Courts : Delhi
CS SCJ No. 547/2025 Ravinder Viswakarma v. Vikas Rai Page No. 5 of 5
-- 5 of 5 --