Delhi District Court
Aye Finance Pvt Ltd vs Shivani Enterprises Through Its ... on 1 April, 2026
In the Court of SCJ-cum-RC, (West District)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.
Presided by : Ms. Richa Sharma
Civil Suit No. 1462/2025
CNR No. DLWT03-002402-2025
Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd.
Through its AR Piyush Kumar,
Having its registered office at:
M-5, Magnu House-1, OPP Milan Cinema,
Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Marg,
Karampura Market, Karampura,
New Delhi, Delhi-110015 ..... Plaintiff
Versus
1) Shivani Enterprises
through its proprietorship
Prakesh Chand Sharma,
Gram Post, Kuthada Khurd, Thesil Bassi,
Jaipur, Shiv Mandir ke Pass-303012,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
2) Prakesh Chand Sharma (proprietor)
Near mahadev Ji mandir 120,
Brachna V Kumhar Mohalla,
Teh-Bassi Kuthara Khurd,
Kunthada Khurd 303012, Rajasthan ....defendantss
Date of Filing : 20.09.2025
Date of Judgment : 01.04.2026
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF Rs. 22,682/- ALONGWITH
PENDENTE LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff seeking Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.04.01
16:05:23
______________________________________________________________________________________________ +0530 Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 1 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma decree for recovery of Rs. 22,682/-, against the defendantss and in favour of the plaintiff.
2. The brief facts as narrated by the plaintiff are that the plaintiff is a private limited company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, having its office at M-5, Magnum House-I, Opp Milan Cinema, Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Marg, Karampura Market, Karampura, Delhi-110015. Plaintiff is engaged in the business of extending financial assistance by way of loan and advances to the business owners for the expansion of their business amount other portfolios which are subject to the guidelines of RBI.
Further, as per the Board Resolution/power of attornye, in favour Mr. Piyush Kumar of the plaintiff to do all acts o behalf of the plaintiff to sign, verify the pleadings for and on behalf of the plaintiff company to institute the suit in the Court and to do all acts in general for due prosecution of the suit.
3. It is stated, that the defendants is a borrower and approached the plaintiff for the purpose of availing the credit facility extended by the pliantif under the "SwitchPe" a digital supply chain finance platform that provides unsecured credit facilities to micro and small businesses for purchasing goods from the distributors.
4. It is further stated, that pursuant to the submission of the Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.04.01
16:05:30
______________________________________________________________________________________________ +0530 Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 2 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma credit loan application form by the defendants, the same was duly scrutinized. The plaintiff sanctioned the credit loan facility to the defendants vide sanctin letter dated 30.08.2024.
5. It is further stated, that thereafter the defendants and plaintiff entered into a loan agreement for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- and the same was executed on 30.08.2024. However, after availing the loan, defendants in blatant disregard of the binding terms of the loan agreement, failed to observe financial discipline and did not adhere to the repayment schedule, thereby committing a continuous breach of the contractual terms. It is further submitted, that despite repeated oral and written demands raised by the plaintiff, the defendants willfully failed and neglected to clear the outstanding dues and remained wholly unresponsive and indifferent to the plaintiff's legitimate claims.
6. It is further stated, that the plaintiff having no other option issued a legal notice dated 30.07.2025 thereby terminating the loan facility and demanding repayment of the entire outstanding amount alongwith interest and additional charges accrued due to the defendants's consistent non payment. Further, as per the guidelines issued by the RBI, if there are more than 3 defaults, the loan account shall be classified as NPA and accordingly, abiding by the RBI guidelines the loan account of the defendants has now slipped into NPA due to regular non payments.
Digitally signed by RICHASHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.04.01 16:05:35 ______________________________________________________________________________________________ +0530 Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 3 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma
7. The summons of the suit were also duly served upon the defendants and as per the tracking report filed by the Ld. proxy counsel for the plaintiff, defendants duly stands served on 24.12.2025. However despite service, defendants failed to file the written statement and accordingly, defendants proceeded exparte vide order dated 16.02.2026.
8. In order to prove its case, the plaintiff examined, Sh. Piyush Kumar, AR of the plaintiff company as PW-1, who led his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW-1/A. He has relied upon the following documents :-
1. Ex. PW-1/1(OSR) is the authority letter
2. Ex. PW-1/2 is the certified copy of sanction letter dated 30.08.2024
3. Ex. PW-1/3 is the certified copy of loan agreement dated 30.08.2024
4. Mark A is the legal notice dated 30.07.2025 alongwith original postal receipt
5. Ex. PW-1/5 is the certified copy of statement of account
9. I have gone through the record carefully. My findings are as under :-
10. In order to prove its case plaintiff got examined PW1- Sh. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 4 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.04.01 16:05:41 +0530 Piyush Kumar, AR of the plaintiff company who in his testimony got exhibited authority letter exhibited as Ex. PW-1/1(OSR), which shows that Sh. Piyush Kumar, is designated as team leader to represent the company for section 138 cases, arbitration, execution petition and police complaints and any kind of legal action or proceedings on behalf of Aye Finance Ltd.
11. Further, in order to prove that the loan facility was granted by the plaintiff to the defendants, PW-1 in his examination has got exhibited various loan documents which were executed between the plaintiff bank and the defendants, as sanction letter dated 30.08.2024, loan agreement dated 30.08.2024 exhibited as Ex. PW-1/2 and Ex. PW-1/3 respectively. Perusal of the above said documents reflects that by way of the loan application form, the defendants had applied for the loan of Rs.40,000/-, which was sanctioned vide sanction letter already exhibited as Ex.PW-1/2.
12. PW1 has also placed on record the statement of account exhibited as Ex. PW-1/5. Perusal of the same reflects, that the outstanding balance is Rs.22,682/-. In support of the computer generated documents, the plaintiff has filed on record of the Court the certificate under Section 63(4)(c) of the BSA, 2023.
Digitally signed by RICHASHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.04.01 16:05:46 +0530 ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 5 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma
13. The plaintiff has also served upon the defendants with the legal notice with proof of service i.e. original postal receipt marked as Mark A and thereby demanding the outstanding amount due against the defendants. It is a settled proposition of law that, if a party despite service of legal notice chooses not to reply to the same, the averments of the notice stands admitted. Furthermore, the legal notice along with postal receipts was also sent by plaintiff to the defendants and at this stage inference can be drawn on the basis of Section 119 of the Bhartiya Sakshar Adhiniyam, 2023 (earlier Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act), which states that, " the court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and/a private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case ." The Clause (f) appended to the section clearly states that, "common course of business has been followed in a particular case, implying that where a letter or legal notice as in the present case is sent to the defendants, it would have ordinarily been delivered in the common course of business to the party to whom it was addressed."
14. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgment titled as Abdul Gaffar vs. DDA 2001 Rajdhani Law Reporter ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 6 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.04.01 16:05:51 +0530 249 that if a legal notice is given by a party, the same is not replied and contents not denied then, silence of the notice raises presumption against him. Another judgment of Hon'ble High Court titled as Kalu Ram v Sita Ram 1980 Rajdhani Law Reporter (Note) 44 is on the same aspect.
15. At this stage, it is also pertinent to mention Section 27 of the General Clauses Act :
"Where any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act authorizes or requires any document to be served by post, whether the expression "serve"
or "given" or "send" or any other expression is used, then, unless a different intention appears, the service shall be deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting by registered post, a letter containing the document, and, unless the contrary is proved, to have been effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."
Digitally
signed by
RICHA
RICHA SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2026.04.01
16:05:55
+0530
______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 7 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma
16. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of K.Bhaskaran vs Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan & Anr. (1999) 7 SCC 510 observed as under :
"The principle incorporated in Section 27 of the General Clauses Act could profitably be imported in a case where the sender had dispatched the notice by post with the direct address written on it. Then it can be deemed to have been served on the addressee, unless he proves that it was not really served and he was not responsible for such non-
service. These were the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dealing with a case relating to service of notice U/s 138 of NI Act. "
17. Thus, in the backdrop of the facts of the present case and the same being read conjointly with the law reproduced as above, it is clear, that the legal notice was sent to defendants by plaintiff and same is marked as Mark A. Despite that the defendants did not reply to the legal notice nor did they make payment of the outstanding amount to the plaintiff and this goes to establish that defendants does not have any valid defence to make against the contentions of plaintiff. Moreover the defendants did not appear before the court Digitally signed by RICHA SHARMA RICHA Date:
SHARMA 2026.04.01
16:06:02
______________________________________________________________________________________________ +0530 Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 8 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma even after service of summons to contest the present suit.
18. The defendants have chosen to remain absent during the entire course of proceedings and henceforth he neither cross examined the plaintiff witness nor led any evidence. Hence, the averments made by the plaintiff remain unchallenged and unrebutted. The suit is within the period of limitation as well as within the pecuniary jurisdiction of this Court. The suit of the plaintiff is, therefore, entitled to be decreed against the defendants. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has argued that plaintiff has duly proved its case by oral as well as documentary evidence on the file. Plaintiff is entitled to recover the suit amount at the agreed rate of interest. Since, defendants did not appear before the Court despite service, therefore, it should be presumed that defendants admits the claim of plaintiff. On these grounds, plaintiff has prayed, that the Suit should be decreed. From the evidence of plaintiff, which has remained unrebutted, case of plaintiff stands proved.
19. Accordingly, the suit of plaintiff is hereby decreed for the sum of Rs.22,682/- alongwith interest @ 6% per annum in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants jointly and severally, from the date of the filing of the suit till its realization. Plaintiff is also entitled to the cost of the suit. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 9 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma Digitally signed by RICHA RICHA SHARMA SHARMA Date:
2026.04.01 16:06:07 +0530 Decree sheet shall be prepared on filing of deficient court fees, if any.
20. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.
Digitally
signed by
RICHA
RICHA SHARMA
Announced in the open Court SHARMA Date:
2026.04.01
on 01.04.2026 16:06:10
+0530
(Richa Sharma)
Sr. Civil Judge - Cum - RC
THC / Delhi / 01.04.2026
______________________________________________________________________________________________ Civil Suit No. 1462/25 Page 10 of 10 Aye Finance Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shivani Enterprises through its proprieter Prakash Chand Sharma