Delhi District Court
Mohd. Amil vs Mohd. Sadiq on 20 May, 2019
.IN THE COURT OF SH. MAYANK GOEL: CIVIL JUDGE09
CENTRAL: TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI
CS No. 3489/17
Mohd. Amil
Prop. Of M/s Inland Export Company,
At 6340, Quresh Nagar,
Sadar Bazar, Delhi.
...... Plaintiff
Vs.
Mohd. Sadiq,
Prop. Of M/S Rafai Traders,
K.G.N Colony,
At4247, Rafai Manzil, Ozhar,
District Nasik,Maharashtra ...... Defendant
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS. 1,80,000/ (RUPEES ONE LAKH EIGHTY
THOUSAND ONLY)
Date of institution : 13.11.2017
Date of decision : 20.05.2019.
Final Order : Exparte Decree
JUDGMENT
1. The factual matrix of the present suit is that the suit has been filed by the plaintiff being proprietor of M/S Inland Export Company against the defendant for recovery of Rs. 1,80,000/. That there are business terms between plaintiff and defendant for past few months. That the defendant approached plaintiff in the month of May, 2017 and requested to lend some money as the defendant was facing financial crises. That the plaintiff agreed to advance the loan to the defendant for the period of two months which was transfered in three installments i.e Rs. 50,000/, Rs. 1,00,000/ and Rs. 30,000/ dated 31.05.2017, 03.06.2017 and 05.06.2017 respectively. That the plaintiff continuoulsy requested to pay the loan amount ___________________________________________________________________________ CS no. 3489/17 Mohd. Amil Vs. Mohd. Sadiq page no. 1 of 4 but the defendant failed to pay the said amount. Thereafter, plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 01.09.2017 to the defendant through his counsel. That the defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 1,80,000/ to the plaintiff. Thus, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant seeking the decree of Rs. 1,80,000/ alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum.
2. Summons of the suit for the settlement of issues were issued to the defendant. Despite service of summons, defendant neither turned up in the court nor filed any written statement and accordingly, defendant was proceeded exparte vide order dated 08.08.2018.
3. In its exparte evidence, the plaintiff has examined himself as PW1, who tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex. PW1/A and relied upon documents Ex PW1/1 Copy of receipt of NEFT transferred (OSR), Ex PW1/2 is Legal notice and Ex PW1/3 is original postal receipt.
4. I have heard the final exparte arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for plaintiff and carefully perused the record.
5. The defendant was proceeded exparte in this case. The evidence of PW1 stands unrebutted/unchallenged as PW1 was not cross examined by the defendant. In view of unchallenged testimony of PW1 and on the basis of material on record, it may be said that the plaintiff has been able to prove its case against the defendant. The plaintiff has claimed the interest @18% per annum which is exorbitant. In the given facts and circumstances, the court is of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the plaintiff is awarded interest @ 10% per annum on the decreetal amount from the date of filing of suit till its realisation.
Relief:
6. In view of the discussion above, the present suit is decreed in favour of plaintiff and ___________________________________________________________________________ CS no. 3489/17 Mohd. Amil Vs. Mohd. Sadiq page no. 1 of 4 against the defendant. The plaintiff is entitled for the decreetal amount of Rs. 1,80,000/ alongwith pendentelite interest and future interest @ 10% per annum on the same from the date of filing of present suit i.e. 13.11.2017 till its realisation. Cost of the present suit is also awarded to the plaintiff.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Digitally signed MAYANK by MAYANK
GOEL
GOEL Date: 2019.05.20
10:22:42 +0530
Annouced in the open court. (Mayank Goel)
Civil Judge09, Central District
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
20.05.2019
___________________________________________________________________________ CS no. 3489/17 Mohd. Amil Vs. Mohd. Sadiq page no. 1 of 4 CS no. 3489/17 Mohd. Amil Vs. Sadiq 20.05.2019 Present: Sh. Abhinav Tyagi, Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Defendant is already exparte.
Vide my separate judgment of even date, the present suit is decreed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant. The plaintiff is entitled for the decreetal amount of Rs. 1,80,000/ alongwith pendentelite interest and future interest @ 10% per annum on the same from the date of filing of present suit i.e. 13.11.2017 till its realisation. Cost of the present suit is also awarded to the plaintiff.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(Mayank Goel) Civil Judge09, Central District Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi 20.05.2019 ___________________________________________________________________________ CS no. 3489/17 Mohd. Amil Vs. Mohd. Sadiq page no. 1 of 4