Delhi District Court
Satendra Malik vs Aman Sharma And Anr on 9 December, 2025
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE-01, SHAHDARA DISTRICT,
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
Presided By : Sh. Jitender, DJS
Civil Suit No: 744/2023
Sh. Satendra Malik
S/o Sh. Ishwar Singh,
R/o B-81/5, Street No.2,
North Chhajjupur, Shahdara,
Delhi-110094. ... Plaintiff
Versus
1. Sh. Aman Sharma
S/o Sh. Kunwar Kishan Sharma,
Proprietor of M.B.S. Construction Company,
2. M.B.S. Construction Company
Through its proprietor Sh. Aman Sharma,
At : Mohalla Charjan, Lahaswada,
Deoband, District Saharanpur,
UP-247554. ... Defendants
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF RS.2,50,000/- (RUPEES
TWO LAC FIFTY THOUSAND ONLY)
ALONGWITH COSTS, PENDENTELITE AND
FUTURE INTEREST UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF
THE CPC.
DATE OF INSTITUTION : 24.07.2023
DATE OF DECISION : 09.12.2025
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit under the provisions of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("CPC") on the basis of two cheques viz. cheque bearing no.048311 dated 25.03.2021 of Rs.1,50,000/- and cheque bearing no.048314 dated 15.07.2021 of Rs.1,00,000/- drawn upon Union Bank of India, Deoband, Distt. Saharanpur, UP. It is prayed in the suit that a Civil Suit No.744/2023 Sh. Satendra Malik v. Sh. Aman Sharma Page No.1 of 4 decree be passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- along with pendentelite and future interest.
2. In brief, the case of the plaintiff as discernible from the plaint and documents is that the plaintiff and the defendant were having business relations with plaintiff as defendants was one of the partner along with the plaintiff in M/s. Seetaram Construction, Deepak Vihar, Kailashpuram Colony, Tehsil Deoband, Distt. Saharanpur, UP.; that after sometime some dispute had been arose between the plaintiff and the defendants and therefore, the partnership was dissolved; that in this regard, a settlement deed was executed between the parties, on 25.11.2020; that as per the said settlement deed, the defendants have issued two cheques viz. cheque bearing no.048311 dated 25.03.2021 of Rs.1,50,000/- and cheque bearing no.048314 dated 15.07.2021 of Rs.1,00,000/- drawn upon Union Bank of India, Deoband, Distt. Saharanpur, UP in favour of the plaintiff; that the plaintiff has presented the said cheques to his banker for encashment: that upon presentation of the said cheques, the same had been dishonoured with the remarks "cheque is outdated" and "cheque with alteration cannot be processed in cheque truncation clearing system" respectively vide returning memos dated 31.03.2021 and 26.10.2021 respectively; that thereafter, the plaintiff had approached the plaintiff to pay the said amount, however, the defendant no.1 has flatly refused to pay the same: that despite requests, the defendant did not pay Rs.2,50,000/- to the plaintiff hence the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the defendants a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- along with pendentelite and future interest and that therefore, the present suit has been filed.
3. A perusal of the order-sheets reveals that upon filing of this suit, the summons as prescribed under Form IV, Appendix B, Schedule 1 of CPC were ordered to be issued qua the defendant, on 16.08.2023; that the defendant was Civil Suit No.744/2023 Sh. Satendra Malik v. Sh. Aman Sharma Page No.2 of 4 duly served through dasti process, on 28.05.2025 and that the record shows that till date, no appearance has been filed by the defendant.
4. Ld. counsel for the plaintiff had submitted that in terms of provisions of Order XXXVII, Rule 2(3) of CPC, since no appearance has been filed by the defendant, the allegations made in the plaint are deemed to be admitted by the defendant and the plaintiff is entitled to judgment, forthwith. I have perused the record very carefully.
5. After perusing the record of the Court file, I find that the present suit has been filed within the period of limitation against the defendant as the defendant had issued the cheque no.048314 on 15.07.2021 and the present suit has been filed, on 24.07.2023. Further, I find that this Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain this suit because the cheques in question were dishonoured within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Also despite service, the defendant has failed to file any appearance within the statutory period. Lastly, I find that the submission made by the Ld. counsel for the plaintiff is in conformity with the provisions of Order XXXVII, Rule 2(3) of CPC. Order XXXVII, Rule 2(3) of CPC 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 the 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."
6. With respect to quantum of interest, I find that the plaintiff has not mentioned any specific rate of interest. As per the directive of Section 34 of the Civil Suit No.744/2023 Sh. Satendra Malik v. Sh. Aman Sharma Page No.3 of 4 CPC, reasonable rate of interest can be ascertained by the Court as deemed fit by it. Under the circumstances of the present case, the plaintiff is granted simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Central Bank of India v Ravindra, AIR 2001 SC 3095, where the grant of pendente-lite and future interest is a subject matter of the discretion of the Court and not to be governed by the agreement between the parties.
7. Thus, in light of the failure of the defendant to file appearance, within the statutory period prescribed under Order XXXVII of CPC, 1908, this suit is hereby decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant for a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lac Fifty Thousand Only) along with simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum, from the defendant from the date of filing of the present suit till its realization.
8. Upon preparation of the decree sheet by the Reader, the file shall be consigned to the record room. Digitally signed by JITENDER JITENDER Date:
2025.12.09 16:24:39 Pronounced in open Court (Jitender) +0530 today on 09.12.2025 Civil Judge-01/Shahdara District Karkardooma Courts/Delhi Note : This Judgment contains 04 pages and all the pages have been checked and signed by me.
Digitally
signed by
JITENDER
JITENDER Date:
2025.12.09
(Jitender) 16:24:43
+0530
Civil Judge-01/Shahdara District
Karkardooma Courts/Delhi
Civil Suit No.744/2023
Sh. Satendra Malik v. Sh. Aman Sharma
Page No.4 of 4