Delhi District Court
Sumit Batra vs Vijay Singh on 21 November, 2025
IN THE COURT OF SH. AJEET NARAYAN
JSCC-ASCJ-GJ, SOUTH EAST DISTRICT, SAKET
COURTS, NEW DELHI
CS SCJ No. 1093/2025
CNR No. DLSE03-001816-2025
In the matter of
Mr. Sumit Batra
Proprietor
M/s Nextgen Enterprises
Shop No. 2 & 15, Central Market, DDA Flats,
Kalkaji, New Delhi - 110019.
... Plaintiff
Versus
Sh. Vijay Singh
S/o Sh. Bhoop Singh
R/o B-12, Type-II, Tower -7,
East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi - 110023.
Also At:
Sh. Vijay Singh (ID card no. 8010)
Designation Multi Tasking Staff
Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India
Indian Audit & Accounts Department
Pocket - 9, Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg,
New Delhi.
... Defendant
Date of Institution : 09.09.2025
Arguments heard : 21.11.2025
Judgment pronounced on : 21.11.2025
Final Judgment : Suit Decreed
CS SCJ No. 1093/2025
Sumit Batra vs. Vijay Singh
Page 1 of 4
SUMMARY SUIT UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF THE
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, FOR THE RECOVERY
OF RS. 2,75,000/- (RUPEES TWO LACS SEVENTY FIVE
THOUSAND ONLY) ALONGWITH INTEREST @ 18%
P.A.
JUDGMENT
1. The present suit has been instituted by the plaintiff against the defendant under Order XXXVII CPC for recovery of Rs. 2,75,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs Seventy Five only) alongwith interest @ 18% p.a.
2. Briefly stated, it is stated in the plaint that the plaintiff is a sole proprietor of M/s Nextgen Enterprises. On 07.03.2025 M/s Nextgen Enterprises sold Refurbished Canon IR Advanced 8095 Digital Multifunction Photocopier, Printer and Scanner Machine to the defendant for Rs.3,00,000/-. Towards purchase consideration, the defendant has paid Rs.25000/- in cash and issued a cheque no. 396216 dated 07.03.2025 for Rs.2,75,000/- in favour of M/s Nextgen Enterprises. When the plaintiff presented the cheque for encashment on 10.03.2025 but the said cheque has been returned unpaid by the bank of the defendant with remarks "Exceeds Arrangement" vide cheque return memo dated 11.03.2025. Thereafter the plaintiff served legal notice dated 21.03.2025 on the defendant through email, whatsapp and speed post dated 21.03.2025. Despite service of legal notice the defendant has not paid any amount within the stipulated period. The defendant is intentionally CS SCJ No. 1093/2025 Sumit Batra vs. Vijay Singh Page 2 of 4 avoiding discharge of his lawful liability towards the plaintiff. With these facts and reasons, the plaintiff has filed the present suit.
3. Summons of the suit were issued to the defendant vide order dated 12.09.2025. Summons sent to the defendant received back with report of service upon the defendant through her daughter on 14.10.2025 but none has appeared on behalf of defendant. The statutory period of 10 days for filing the appearance under Order XXXVII CPC has already expired. Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has thus, prayed that the suit be decreed in terms of Order XXXVII CPC.
4. Arguments have been heard and record has been perused.
5. The plaintiff, in order to corroborate the claims, has placed reliance upon the cheque bearing no. 396216 dated 07.03.2025 issued by the defendant alongwith return memos dated 11.03.2025. The plaintiff also sent a legal notice to the defendant calling upon him to repay the outstanding amount due but the defendant failed to make payment of the due amount. Additionally, the defendant failed to even respond to the legal notice of the plaintiff.
6. It has been observed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in C.R.P. No.42/2019 titled as 'M/s S.S. Steel Industry Vs M/s Shri Guru Hargobind Steels decided on 05.09.2019' that once the summons for appearance have been duly served upon the defendant under Order XXXVII CS SCJ No. 1093/2025 Sumit Batra vs. Vijay Singh Page 3 of 4 CPC, the only concomitant result would be for the averments in the plaint to be deemed as admitted and for the suit to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff, when the defendant fails to enter appearance as per procedure.
7. Despite service, the defendant has failed to put up an appearance within the stipulated period. Accordingly, the facts, as averred in the plaint in view of Order XXXVII Rule 2 (3) CPC, are deemed to have been admitted by the defendant and the plaintiff is held entitled to a decree in terms of the said provision.
8. The suit is accordingly, decreed under Order XXXVII Rule 2 (3) CPC against the defendant and in favour of the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. 2,75,000/- along-with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 07.03.2025 till the date of its realization. The court does not deem it fit to grant interest at the rate of 18 % per annum as the same is excessive.
9. Costs of the suit be awarded in favour of the plaintiff.
10. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the record room after necessary compliance.
Digitally
signed by
Pronounced in the open AJEET
AJEET
NARAYAN
NARAYAN
court today i.e. 21.11.2025
Date:
2025.11.21
16:35:46
(AJEET NARAYAN)+0530
JSCC-ASCJ-GJ:South-East
Saket Courts:Delhi:21.11.2025
CS SCJ No. 1093/2025
Sumit Batra vs. Vijay Singh
Page 4 of 4