Delhi District Court
Manoj Kumar vs Manav Sachdeva on 9 February, 2026
Page no. 1 of 5
IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE-02, SOUTH,
SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
16 CS DJ 50/23
MANOJ KUMAR Vs. MANAV SACHDEVA
09.02.2026
Present: Sh. Abhinav Sharma, Ld. counsel for plaintiff
(through VC).
Ms. Srishti Sharma, Ld. proxy counsel for
defendant.
1.Written statement on behalf of defendant was filed on 08.01.2026.
2. Ld. counsel for plaintiff submits that the application for leave to defend, filed by defendant, was conditionally allowed by Ld. Predecessor of this Court vide which defendant was directed to deposit Rs. 20,00,000/- in the form of Demand Draft drawn in the name of District Judge-02, South within four weeks from the date of order i.e. 14.11.2025. He further submits that defendant has not complied the said order.
3. Ld. proxy counsel for defendant submits that defendant was not aware of the said order and seeks one more opportunity to comply with order dated 14.11.2025.
4. Before proceeding further, it would be relevant to discuss the facts of the case which led to filing the above- mentioned application.
Arul Digitally signed
by Arul Varma
Date: 2026.02.09
Varma 17:33:47 +0530
Page no. 2 of 5
5. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff under order XXXVII of the CPC seeking recovery of Rs.25,00,000/- from the defendant. The defendant was served summons of the present suit as per law and he entered appearance. He filed an application seeking leave to defend the suit after receiving the summons for judgment.
6. The reply to the application for leave to defend was filed by the plaintiff. Arguments were heard. Vide order dated 14.11.2025, a conditional leave to defend the suit was granted to the defendant by the Court, directing the defendant to deposit the suit amount i.e. deposit Rs. 20,00,000/- in the form of Demand Draft drawn in the name of District Judge-02, South within four weeks from the date of order i.e. 14.11.2025.
7. The fact remains that the said amount has not been deposited by the defendant as yet. A perusal of order 19.11.2025 reveals that Ld. counsel Sh. G.B. Singh appeared on behalf of defendant and submitted that vide order dated 14.11.2025, the defendant has been granted leave to defend and defendant was granted liberty to file written statement well within time as per rules. However, the written statement on behalf of defendant was filed on 08.01.2026.
8. Ld. counsel for the plaintiff submits that the defendant is misusing the process of law. The Court has already passed an order granted conditional leave to defend the suit. The defendant has not complied with the said direction. This Court Digitally signed Arul by Arul Varma Date: 2026.02.09 Varma 17:33:52 +0530 Page no. 3 of 5 cannot enhance the time already fixed by the Court to deposit the amount. Hence, it is prayed that the application may be dismissed and the suit may be decreed.
9. I have heard the submissions and carefully perused the material available on record.
10. Order XXXVII of the CPC provides the summary procedure for certain kinds of suits mentioned in the Rule 1 of the order. After institution of the suit, summons in a prescribed format are issued by the Court. The defendant has to enter appearance in the Court within 10 days from the date of service of the summons if he wants to defend the suit. After the defendant enters his appearance, the plaintiff has to apply for summons for judgment which are required to be served upon the defendant. After service of summons for judgment, the defendant has to file an application seeking leave to defend the suit disclosing his defence, within 10 days from the date of service. After receiving the reply, if any, from the plaintiff the Court may grant leave to defend the suit unconditionally or upon such terms as may appear to the Court as just. Rule (3)(6)
(b) of the order provides that if the defendant is permitted to defend as to the whole or any part of the claim, the Court may direct him to give such security and within such time as may be fixed by the Court and on failure to give such security within the time specified by the Court, the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgment forthwith. Digitally signed Arul by Arul Varma Date:
Varma 2026.02.09
17:33:56
+0530
Page no. 4 of 5
11. In the present case vide order dated 14.11.2025, the Court had granted conditional leave to defend the suit to the defendant and directed him to deposit Rs. 20,00,000/- in the form of Demand Draft drawn in the name of District Judge-02, South within four weeks from the said date. The defendant has not deposited the said amount in the Court as yet after expiry of more than 100 days of the said order. The only reason provided by the defendant in the present application, which has been moved after more than 100 days of the said order is that he is not in a capacity to deposit the said amount. He has not come forward to deposit any part of the said amount at any point of time from the date of the said order till today. I do not find any reasonable explanation from the defendant qua non payment of the said amount. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the defendant can not be granted further time to deposit the amount as directed by order dated 14.11.2025.
12. In the light of discussion hereinabove and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the plea of Ld. proxy counsel for the defendant seeking time to deposit the amount is denied as without merits.
13. In view of the above, the application filed by the plaintiff seeking relief as prayed in the suit is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
14. The plaintiff is entitled to a decree under order XXXVII of the CPC to recover Rs.25,00,000/- from the Digitally signed Arul by Arul Varma Date: Varma 2026.02.09 17:34:00 +0530 Page no. 5 of 5 defendant. The plaintiff is also entitled to interest @ 6 % p.a. from the date of filing of the suit to the date of decree and interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of decree to the date of payment. The Plaintiff is also entitled to the cost of the suit.
15. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
16. File be consigned to record room after due compliance. Arul Digitally signed by Arul Varma Varma Date: 2026.02.09 17:34:05 +0530 (Arul Varma) District Judge-02/South District/ Saket Courts/New Delhi/09.02.2026