Delhi District Court
Sudesh Rani vs Amit Panchal on 23 December, 2024
IN THE COURT OF MS AUNRADHA JINDAL, ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE-CUM- JUDGE SMALL CAUSE
COURT-CUM-GUARDIAN JUDGE, DISTRICT: SOUTH,
NEW DELHI
CS SCJ 168/20
SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL
CNR No.DLST03-000241-2020
SMT. SUDESH RANI
D/O LATE SH. ATTAR SINGH
R/O B-161/1, UGF LEFT SIDE,
GUJJAR DAIRY, GAUTAM NAGAR,
NEW DELHI - 110049.
...PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
AMIT PANCHAL
S/O INDERVEER SINGH
R/O 104D, ARJUN NAGAR, NEAR MATA MANDIR
NEAR DEER PARK,
NEW DELHI-110029.
.....DEFENDANT
SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF
RS.2,77,000/- WITH INTEREST
Date of institution : 15.02.2020
Date of judgment : 23.12.2024
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 1/15
The Case
1.This suit arises from a financial dispute involving the plaintiff, Ms. Sudesh Rani, and the defendant, Mr. Amit Kumar Panchal, her nephew. The plaintiff contends that the defendant sought financial assistance on multiple occasions between May and July 2019, citing urgent personal needs. Out of goodwill and familial ties, the plaintiff provided financial aid amounting to Rs.2,77,000/- through credit card transactions and payments facilitated via the Mobikwik application.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant agreed to repay the amount before the due dates of her credit card statements. Despite repeated assurances and several demands, the defendant allegedly failed to honor his commitments, leaving the plaintiff burdened with unpaid credit card dues and penalties. Frustrated by the defendant's inaction and continued evasion, the plaintiff initiated this legal action to recover the principal amount along with interest and associated costs.
3. The defendant was served notice of the suit but failed to appear, leading the court to proceed ex-parte. The plaintiff has presented her evidence through affidavits and summoned witnesses from relevant entities, including Mobikwik and Vodafone Idea Ltd., to substantiate her CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 2/15 claims regarding the transactions. The case highlights issues of trust, familial obligations, and financial accountability within personal relationships.
The Proceedings: A Chronology
4. The case commenced on 15.02.2020 with the filing of a suit for recovery of Rs.2,77,000/- by the plaintiff. The court issued summons to the defendant. On 19.11.2020, the plaintiff's counsel requested electronic service through email and WhatsApp due to the pandemic. The court allowed the request, directing the plaintiff to file an affidavit verifying the defendant's contact details. On 15.02.2022, service on the defendant was completed. The defendant's counsel, acknowledged receipt of the plaint and documents. The court directed the defendant to file a written statement within the statutory period and allowed the plaintiff to file a replication, if necessary.
5. On 04.11.2022, the defendant failed to file a written statement. The court struck off the defendant's defense and proceeded ex parte. The matter was listed for ex parte plaintiff evidence. On 20.12.2022, the plaintiff filed an affidavit of evidence, which was taken on record. On 25.01.2023, the plaintiff's witness PW-1 was examined and discharged. The court directed the plaintiff to file an application for summoning additional witnesses within seven days.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 3/15
6. On 14.03.2023, the plaintiff moved an application to summon witnesses. The court allowed the application and issued summons. On 04.05.2023, two witnesses appeared before the court. PW2 Ajit Singh was examined and discharged, while PW Surender Kumar sought additional time to produce records. Summons to another witness from Mobikwik were returned unserved. The court directed the plaintiff to verify the witness's address and reissue summons.
7. On 05.07.2023, PW Surender Kumar failed to appear despite being bound down. Summons to the Mobikwik witness were not received back. The court sought an explanation from the Nazarat Branch and reissued summons to both witnesses. On 13.09.2023, summons were reissued to the remaining witnesses. On 20.11.2023, the plaintiff decided not to examine the witness from Bharti Airtel, discharging him from the list. Summons to the Mobikwik witness were reissued. On 03.07.2024, PW3 Rajat Goel was examined and discharged, and the plaintiff declared the conclusion of evidence. The matter was then listed for ex parte final arguments.
8. This Court has duly considered the final arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the plaintiff. The Court has meticulously examined the entire record, giving careful attention to the pleadings, the evidence presented, and the submissions made on behalf of the plaintiff. Each aspect of the case has been analysed in light of the relevant facts and CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 4/15 law, ensuring that all material brought before the Court has been fully reviewed and assessed in reaching a fair and just decision.
The Plaint
9. Pleaded case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff, a law- abiding citizen with faith in the justice system, seeks recovery of Rs. 2,77,000/- along with interest from the defendant, who is the plaintiff's nephew and the son of the plaintiff's elder sister, Smt. Usha Rani. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant sought financial assistance of Rs. 95,000/- in May and June 2019, citing urgent personal needs. The plaintiff, moved by familial ties and the defendant's persistent requests, provided this amount in installments. A portion of this amount, i.e., Rs. 43,750/- was debited by the defendant from the plaintiff's ICICI Bank credit card through five separate transactions.
10.The defendant agreed to repay the amount before the credit card's due date, 09.07.2019, but failed to do so despite repeated reminders and oral communications by the plaintiff. The plaintiff further states that, in addition to the Rs. 95,000/- borrowed earlier, the defendant requested further financial assistance between 01.07.2019 and 04.07.2019, amounting to Rs. 1,82,000/-. These amounts were transferred through six separate transactions via the Mobikwik app and the plaintiff's IndusInd Bank credit card, using various mobile numbers.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 5/15
11.The cumulative amount borrowed by the defendant during May and July 2019 totals Rs. 2,77,000/-. Despite assurances, the defendant failed to repay any part of the borrowed sum. The plaintiff repeatedly requested the defendant to settle the dues and even visited the defendant's residence on multiple occasions. However, the defendant has not returned any portion of the borrowed amount to date. The cause of action arose in: May and June 2019, when the defendant borrowed Rs. 95,000/- and debited the plaintiff's ICICI credit card; July 2019, when the defendant borrowed Rs. 1,82,000/- through multiple transactions and committed to repay the amount by the due date; Each subsequent instance when the plaintiff demanded repayment and the defendant refused or failed to comply. The cause of action continues as the defendant has not repaid the sum of Rs. 2,77,000/- to the plaintiff.
12.The plaintiff and defendant both reside in Delhi, and the transactions occurred in Delhi, establishing this Court's territorial jurisdiction. Appropriate court fees have been affixed to the plaint. The plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court may be pleased to:
a) Decree recovery of Rs. 2,77,000/- in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant, along with pendente lite and future interest at 18% per annum from the date of filing of the suit until realization of the amount;
b) Award costs of the suit to the plaintiff;
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 6/15
c) Grant any other reliefs deemed fit and proper by this Court in the interest of justice.
Plaintiff's Evidence PW-1/Plaintiff, Ms. Sudesh Rani
13.PW-1 tendered evidence in support of the present suit by way of an affidavit, exhibited as Ex. PW1/1, bearing her signature at points A and B. In furtherance of her testimony, PW-1 relied upon the following documents as evidence:
o Ex. PW1/2: IndusInd Bank credit card statement for the period from 01.07.2019 to 04.07.2019. o Ex. PW1/3: ICICI Bank credit card statement for the period from 22.05.2019 to 06.06.2019. o Ex. PW1/4 (OSR): Photocopy of the ICICI Bank credit card.
o Mark PW1/5: Photocopy of the IndusInd Bank credit card.
o Ex. PW1/6 (OSR): Copy of the Aadhaar Card of PW-1. o Mark A: Details of all 11 transactions carried out via the Mobikwik application.
14.It was noted that the defendant had already been proceeded against ex parte by this Court.
Evidence Affidavit of PW-1
15.PW-1, Ms. Sudesh Rani, deposed that she is the plaintiff in the case and is well-acquainted with its facts and CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 7/15 circumstances. PW-1 testified that she is a law-abiding citizen and the defendant is her nephew, the son of her elder sister, Ms. Usha Rani. The defendant approached PW-1 in May and June 2019, seeking financial assistance of Rs.95,000/- due to urgent personal needs. Owing to familial ties and persistent requests, PW-1 provided the amount, which was debited from her ICICI Bank credit card through five transactions initiated by the defendant.
16.It was agreed that the defendant would repay the amount before the credit card's due date. Despite several oral requests and follow-ups, the defendant deliberately failed to fulfill his repayment obligations. PW-1 stated that the defendant partially repaid Rs.95,000/- through Mobikwik in staggered transactions: Rs.21,000/- on 31.05.2019, Rs.15,000/- and Rs.16,000/- on 01.06.2019, Rs.22,000/- on 05.06.2019, and Rs.21,000/- on 06.06.2019. The defendant promised to clear the remaining dues before 09.07.2019 but failed to do so.
17.Subsequently, in July 2019, the defendant sought additional amounts: Rs.33,000/- on 01.07.2019, Rs.88,000/- on 02.07.2019, Rs.30,000/- on 03.07.2019, and Rs.31,000/- on 04.07.2019. PW-1 provided these sums through her IndusInd Bank credit card and the Mobikwik app, involving six transactions linked to multiple mobile numbers. In total, the defendant borrowed Rs.2,77,000/-, comprising Rs.95,000/- in May and June 2019 and Rs.1,82,000/- in July CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 8/15 2019. Despite repeated oral requests and personal visits to the defendant's residence, no repayment was made.
18.PW-1 claimed the right to recover Rs.2,77,000/- along with interest and penalties borne by her. She asserted that the defendant has willfully failed to pay the amount, necessitating the filing of the present suit. PW-1 closed her evidence asserting that the contents of her affidavit and the supporting documents collectively demonstrate her claim against the defendant.
PW-2/ Sh. Ajit Singh, Alternate Nodal Officer, Vodafone IDEA Ltd.
19.PW-2, Sh. Ajit Singh, son of Sh. Om Prakash, appeared as a summoned witness and provided evidence under oath. PW-2 represented Vodafone IDEA Ltd. and brought the relevant records concerning mobile numbers associated with the defendant, Amit Kumar Panchal. PW-2 presented the following details:
o The mobile number 9971672162, registered in the name of the defendant, Amit Kumar Panchal, was operational from 21.10.2017 to 06.02.2020. This record was exhibited as Ex. PW2/1.
o The mobile number 9811266799, also registered in the name of the defendant, was operational during the following periods:
From 23.07.2018 to 16.02.2019, exhibited as Ex.
PW2/2.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 9/15 From 28.05.2019 to 01.02.2020, exhibited as Ex.
PW2/3.
o PW-2 produced a prepaid customer application form for mobile number 9811266799, registered in the name of the defendant, which was exhibited as Ex. PW2/4. o Additionally, PW-2 submitted a copy of the application form of the defendant, Amit Kumar Panchal, applying for a business number bearing mobile number 9811266799, exhibited as Ex. PW2/5 (colly.). o PW-2 further provided a Certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, certifying the authenticity of the electronic records, which was exhibited as Ex. PW2/6.
20.The defendant, having been proceeded ex parte, did not contest the evidence presented by PW-2.
PW-3/ Rajat Goel, Senior Manager (Legal), One Mobikwik System Ltd.
21.He appeared as a summoned witness and produced the relevant records pertaining to the case. The documents brought by him include:
o Ledger statement for the mobile number 8178936460 covering the period from 11.02.2017 to 27.02.2020, exhibited as Ex. PW3/1.
o Ledger statement for the mobile number 9811266799 covering the period from 09.10.2017 to 20.03.2021, exhibited as Ex. PW3/2.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 10/15 o Ledger statement for the mobile number 9971672162 covering the period from 01.05.2016 to 20.03.2021, exhibited as Ex. PW3/3.
22.The defendant has been proceeded against ex-parte.
Final Arguments on behalf of plaintiff
23.Learned Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the plaintiff has brought forth this suit seeking recovery of Rs.2,77,000/- with interest, arising from financial assistance extended to the defendant, who is her nephew. Despite multiple assurances, the defendant failed to honor his commitment to repay the amount. The defendant, having been duly served, chose not to appear, resulting in an ex-parte proceeding.
24.The plaintiff presented her testimony (PW-1), supported by documentary evidence, including credit card statements from ICICI and IndusInd Banks, and transaction records from the Mobikwik application. These documents corroborate her claim of having transferred Rs.95,000/- in May and June 2019 and an additional Rs.1,82,000/- in July 2019. The testimony of PW-2 and PW-3, officials from Vodafone Idea Ltd. and Mobikwik Systems Ltd., respectively, further established the defendant's ownership of the mobile numbers used for the transactions and validated the financial transfers.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 11/15
25.The defendant's non-appearance and lack of rebuttal leave the plaintiff's evidence uncontested. The plaintiff respectfully seeks a decree for the recovery of Rs.2,77,000/- with interest at 18% per annum from the date of filing until realization, along with costs of the suit. Given the evidence and legal principles, the plaintiff humbly prays for relief in her favor.
Analysis and Findings
26.The plaintiff, Ms. Sudesh Rani, has instituted the present suit seeking recovery of Rs.2,77,000/- along with pendent lite and future interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the defendant, Mr. Amit Kumar Panchal. The claim arises out of financial assistance extended by the plaintiff to the defendant on multiple occasions, which the latter has failed to repay despite repeated demands and assurances. The defendant, after being duly served with the summons, did not appear to contest the matter and was accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
27.The plaintiff, a law-abiding citizen, stated that the defendant, her nephew, approached her between May and July 2019 seeking financial assistance, citing urgent personal needs. Out of goodwill and considering their familial relationship, the plaintiff extended Rs.95,000/- to the defendant in May and June 2019 through her ICICI CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 12/15 Bank credit card. Subsequently, in July 2019, the plaintiff transferred an additional Rs.1,82,000/- to the defendant through Mobikwik transactions and her IndusInd Bank credit card. The plaintiff contended that the defendant assured her that the entire amount would be repaid before the due dates of the respective credit card payments.
28.Despite several verbal reminders and personal visits by the plaintiff, the defendant failed to honor his commitment and did not repay a single penny of the total amount. The plaintiff, therefore, initiated this suit to recover the outstanding sum of Rs.2,77,000/- with interest. The plaintiff, to substantiate her claim, tendered her evidence as PW-1 through an affidavit and relied upon documentary evidence. Further corroboration was provided through the testimonies of independent witnesses.
29.PW-2: Mr. Ajit Singh, Alternate Nodal Officer, Vodafone Idea Ltd., who produced records confirming that the mobile numbers used for the transactions were registered in the defendant's name. PW-3: Mr. Rajat Goel, Senior Manager, Mobikwik Systems Ltd., who submitted ledger statements verifying the financial transfers through the Mobikwik app to the defendant.
30.The defendant, despite being granted ample opportunities, failed to appear or file a written statement, leaving the evidence presented by the plaintiff unrebutted and unchallenged.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 13/15
31.After a careful perusal of the pleadings, evidence, and documents submitted by the plaintiff, the court finds as follows:
o The plaintiff has successfully established through credible oral and documentary evidence that an amount of Rs.2,77,000/- was transferred to the defendant over several transactions.
o The defendant's failure to repay the amount, coupled with his absence from the proceedings, unequivocally demonstrates a breach of his promise and negligence in fulfilling his financial obligations. o The plaintiff has, therefore, proved her case beyond a preponderance of probabilities, and her entitlement to recovery of the claimed amount is justified.
Relief:
32.Considering the evidence on record and the lack of any rebuttal from the defendant, the suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed. The plaintiff is entitled to the following reliefs:
o A decree is passed in favor of the plaintiff, directing the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.2,77,000/-. o The defendant is further directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the principal amount from the date of filing of the suit till the realization of the decretal amount.
o Costs of the suit are also awarded to the plaintiff.
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 14/15
33.The decree sheet shall be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.
Digitally signed
ANURADHA by ANURADHA
Announced in the open court JINDAL
JINDAL
Date: 2024.12.23
on 23.12.2024. (ANURADHA JINDAL)
17:38:29 +0530
ASCJ-cum-JSCC-CUM-GJ (South)
Saket Courts, New Delhi
CS SCJ NO. 168/20 SUDESH RANI Vs. AMIT PANCHAL 15/15