Delhi District Court
Sumit Batra vs Sandeep Kumar on 25 February, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. TARUNPREET KAUR
ACJ-CUM-CCJ-CUM-ARC
SOUTH-EAST, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS SCJ 1107/2025
SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR
Sumit Batra
Proprietor of M/s Nextgen Enterprises
Shop No.2& 15, Central Market, DDA Flats,
Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019
.... plaintiff
Versus
Sandeep Kumar
S/o Late Sh. Santram
R/o Quarter No. Type I-451, Ground Floor,
Ansari Nagar (East), AIIMS, New Delhi-110029
Also at : Sandeep Kumar (ID Card No. C/2242/23)
(Employee ID No. E0400238)
Designation : Multi Tasking Staff
Department : Dr. BRAIRCH
Office of Medical Superintendent,
Dr. B.R.A Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital IRCH,
Cancer Insitute, AIIMS, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi-110029
.... defendant
SUMMARY SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR RECOVERY
OF Rs. 2,75,000/- (RUPEES TWO LAKH AND SEVENTY
FIVE THOUSAND ONLY) ALONG WITH PENDENT-
LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST AND COSTS
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 11.09.2025
DATE OF DECISION : 25.02.2026
CS SCJ 1107/2025 Digitally
SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR signed by
TARUNPREET
Page No. 1 of 5 TARUNPREET KAUR
KAUR Date:
2026.02.25
14:46:09
+0530
JUDGMENT
1. Vide this judgment, the present suit filed on behalf of the plaintiff against the defendant under Order XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CPC"), for recovery of Rs. 2,75,000/- alongwith pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum and cost, shall be disposed of.
2. The plaintiff is a sole proprietor of "M/s Nextgen Enterprises". On 05.06.2025, the proprietorship concern of the plaintiff i.e. "M/s Nextgen Enterprises" had sold Refurbished Cannon IR Advanced 8095 Digital Multifunction Photocopier Printer and Scanner machine to defendant for an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/-. It has been further averred that towards the purchase consideration, the defendant had paid Rs. 25,000/- in cash and he had issued cheque dated 05.06.2025, bearing no. 032386, for Rs. 2,75,000/- in favour of "M/s Nextgen Enterprises". It has been further averred that on presentation, the aforesaid cheque had been returned dishonored vide return memo dated 09.06.2025, with remarks "Exceeds Arrangement". Further, the plaintiff served legal notice dated 16.06.2025 upon the defendant for calling upon him to make payment of the aforesaid amount. When no payment had been made by the defendant despite receipt of aforesaid legal notice, CS SCJ 1107/2025 Digitally SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR signed by TARUNPREET Page No. 2 of 5 TARUNPREET KAUR KAUR Date:
2026.02.25 14:46:16 +0530 complaint case u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act had been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant and the said matter is pending disposal. In addition to that, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of the aforesaid amount.
3. Summons of the suit as per Form no. IV, Appendix B, Schedule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure as per Order XXXVII, were issued upon defendant vide order dated 17.09.2025 and the same were duly served upon him on 19.11.2025. Appearance had also been entered into on behalf of defendant on 26.11.2025, however, no appearance had been filed on his behalf within the stipulated period of 10 days of service.
4. Since the defendant failed to enter an appearance within 10 days of service of the summons, the plaintiff company has therefore, become entitled to a decree as per order XXXVII Rule 3(1) CPC. The said provision 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 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."
CS SCJ 1107/2025 Digitally
SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR signed by
TARUNPREET
Page No. 3 of 5 TARUNPREET KAUR
KAUR Date:
2026.02.25
14:46:22
+0530
5. Further, it has been averred that the transaction in question had taken place at Kalkaji and also the part payment had been made by the defendant to the plaintiff at the aforesaid place. It has been further averred that therefore, the cause of action has arisen in Kalkaji, which falls within the territorial jurisdiction of this court.
6. Final arguments addressed on behalf of the plaintiff have been heard and the record has been perused. It was submitted by Ld. counsel for plaintiff that the present suit u/o 37 CPC has been filed on basis of a cheque which had been issued by the defendant in order to discharge his liability. He further submitted that the invoice, which had been raised with respect to the transaction in question, has been placed on record. He further submitted that proceedings u/s 138 NI Act are also being pursued by the plaintiff and legal notice had also been issued by the plaintiff to the defendant.
7. The plaintiff has also sought pendente-lite and future interest @ 18% per annum from the date of this suit till the date of realization of the decretal amount. It is pertinent to note that, as per the pleadings, there is no agreement between the parties with respect to rate of interest payable upon the outstanding dues. The grant of interest being a discretionary relief, considering the facts and circumstances of the present matter, this court is of the opinion that simple interest @ 6% per annum is just and equitable to be granted with respect to CS SCJ 1107/2025 SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR Digitally signed by Page No. 4 of 5 TARUNPREET TARUNPREET KAUR KAUR Date:
2026.02.25 14:46:28 +0530 pendent-lite interest. Furthermore, the future interest is being declined as the same has not been provided for under provisions of Order XXXVII CPC.
8. Accordingly, the present suit stands decreed in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant and the following reliefs are granted to the plaintiff :-
i) A money decree for a sum of Rs. 2,75,000/-
(RUPEES TWO LAKH AND SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND ONLY) as principal amount, alongwith with pendente lite @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of this suit till the date of decree.
ii) Costs of the suit, as per rules.
9. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
Announced in open Court Digitally signed
by
TARUNPREET TARUNPREET
on 25th of February, 2026 KAUR KAUR
Date: 2026.02.25
14:46:35 +0530
(TARUNPREET KAUR)
ACJ-cum-CCJ-cum-ARC,
South-East District, Saket Courts, ND CS SCJ 1107/2025 SUMIT BATRA VS SANDEEP KUMAR Page No. 5 of 5