Delhi District Court
Cs No.293/20 Rajender Kumar vs . P.Suresh Kumar Page No.1/4 on 7 January, 2021
IN THE COURT OF Ms. SAUMYA CHAUHAN, SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE-CUM-RENT CONTROLLER (EAST): DELHI
CS No. 293/20
Suit filed on- 07.08.2020
Date of decision- 07.01.2021
Rajender Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Braham Singh
R/o-27-E, Pocket-3, Mayur Vihar,
Phase-I, Delhi-110091 ........plaintif
Versus
P. Suresh Kumar
S/o Sh.M.Poonu Nadar,
R/o Employee Code-140, IDc No.-191/2018
Designation-Data Processing Assistant (DPA),
At National Crime Records Bureau,
Ministry of Home Afairs, National Highway-8,
Gurgaon, Delhi Exp. Mandi,
Mahipalpur, New Delhi,
Delhi-110037 .....defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF Rs.20,000/-(RS. TWENTY
THOUSAND) UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE WITH PENDENT-LITE AND FUTURE
INTEREST @12% P.A.
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit is for recovery of Rs.20,000/- under Order 37 CPC filed by plaintif.
2. The brief facts of the case as per the plaint are that in the month of August, 2018, the defendant being in urgent and immediate needs of Rs.20,000/- as his wife is not well, CS No.293/20 Rajender Kumar Vs. P.Suresh Kumar page no.1/4 approached the plaintif and requested him to give a friendly loan of Rs.20,000/- for a period of one month. It is further stated that on 20.08.2018, the plaintif advanced a friendly loan of Rs.20,000/- in cash to the defendant. On 20.08.2018, the same day, the defendant gave a hand-written undertaking by his own pen to the plaintif on the e-stamp paper dt.20.08.2018 at the time of giving the friendly loan.
3. It is further stated that defendant for discharge for his liability to pay Rs.20,000/- had issued a post dated A/C payee cheque bearing no.386446, dt.20.09.2018 for a sum of Rs.20,000/- in favour of the plaintif. Thereafter, in the month of October, 2018, the plaintif presented the said aforesaid cheque for encashment to his banker. However, same was returned unpaid with the remark/reason "Funds Insufficient"
vide memo dt.17.10.2018 which was received to the plaintif on 25.10.2018.
4. It is further stated that after dishonour of the said cheque, the plaintif demanded the cheque amount many times from the defendant. However, defendant failed to give even a single penny to the plaintif. Hence, plaintif filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.20,000/- with interest pendent- lite and future interest @ 12% P.A till its realization. The plaintif has filed some original documents which are as under:-
1. Original hand written undertaking of the defendant dt.20.08.2018.
2. Original cheque bearing no.386446 dt.20.09.2018.
3. Original bank returning memo dt.17.10.2018.
CS No.293/20 Rajender Kumar Vs. P.Suresh Kumar page no.2/4
5. Summons of the suit in Form No.IV in Appendix-B of CPC as per Order-37 CPC were issued upon the defendant vide order dt.17.11.2020 and the same were duly served upon the defendant on 21.12.2020. The summons also carry the signature of the defendant. However, despite the service of the summons, defendant has failed to enter an appearance within 10 days of service of the summons, as required by Order -37 R.3 (1) CPC, and even thereafter.
6. Order 37 R.3 (1) CPC provides as follows:-
"3. Procedure for the appearance of defendant:-
(1) In a suit to which this order applies, the plaintiff shall, together with the summons under rule 2, serve on the defendant a copy of the plaint and annexures thereto and the defendant may, at any time within 10 days of such service, enter an appearance either in person or by pleader and, in either case, he shall file in court an address for service of notices on him."
7. As per Order 37 R.3(1) CPC the defendant should have appeared in person or through pleader and filed an address for service of notice to him. In the case at hand, since, the defendant has failed to enter an appearance within 10 days of service of the summons, the plaintif is entitled to a decree as per Order 37 R.2(3) CPC which reads as under:-
"(3) The defendant shall not defend the suit referred to in sub rule (1) unless he enters an appearance and in default of his entering an appearance the allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be CS No.293/20 Rajender Kumar Vs. P.Suresh Kumar page no.3/4 entitled to a decree for any sum, not exceeding the sum mentioned in the summons, together with interest at the rate specified, if any, up to the date of decree and such sum for costs as may be determined by the High Court from time to time by rules made in that behalf and such decree may be executed forthwith."
8. Accordingly, the plaintif becomes entitled to a decree for the undisputed sum of Rs.20,000/-. The cost of the suit is also awarded against the defendant, as per rules. The rate of interest claimed by plaintif i.e. 12% per annum is unreasonable and excessive. Hence, I deem it fit to grant interest @ 9% per annum. It is also pertinent to mention here that the future interest as prayed has not been granted as same is not provided U/O 37 Rule 2 (3) CPC.
9. Thus, in view of the above said discussions, the present suit is disposed of in favour of the plaintif for uncontested sum of Rs.20,000/- together with pendentlite interest at the rate @ 9% per annum upto the date of decree. The cost of the suit is awarded against the defendant, as per rules.
10. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room after completing the necessary formalities.
Digitally signed by SAUMYA SAUMYA CHAUHAN
Announced in the Court CHAUHAN Date: 2021.01.12
17:28:33 +0530
today the 7th January, 2021
(SAUMYA CHAUHAN)
SCJ-cum-RC, East
CS No.293/20 Rajender Kumar Vs. P.Suresh Kumar page no.4/4