Delhi District Court
Ashok Kumar vs M/S Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises on 18 February, 2026
IN THE COURT OF MS. RENU : CIVIL JUDGE : NORTH
DISTRICT, ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
CS SCJ-1003/2024
CNR No. DLNT030015592024
In reference:
SH. ASHOK KUMAR
PROP. OF M/S BALAJI INDUSTRIES,
G-129, SECTOR-5, DSIDC,
BAWANA INDUSTRIAL AREA,
DELHI. ............Plaintiff
VERSUS
M/S JAI SHRI SHYAM ENTERPRISES
T-4/66, SECOND FLOOR, PHASE-I,
MANGOLPURI INDUSTRIAL AREA,
NORTH-WEST DELHI, DELHI-110083
(THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR
SMT. USHA GUPTA). ........... Defendant
Date of Institution : 09.09.2024
Date of reservation of Judgment : 12.02.2026
Date of Judgment : 18.02.2026
Decision : Decreed
EX-PARTE J U D G M E N T
CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 1 of 10
1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff against the defendant for
recovery of Rs. 1,86,650/- alongwith pendentelite and future interest
@ 12% per annum.
FACTS AS PER THE PLAINT :-
2. (i) The case of the plaintiff as per plaint in brief are that Sh. Ashok Kumar is carrying on the business under the name and style of M/s Balaji Industries, and deals in various kind of plastic material from G-129, Sector-5, DSIDC, Bawan Industrial Area, Delhi. Smt. Usha Gupta is doing the business in the name and style of M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises, at T-4/66, Second Floor, Phase-I, Mangolpuri Industrial Area, North-West, Delhi and she is the proprietor of the defendant firm. The orders were placed for the supply of footwears in the name of the defendant firm. The plaintiff raised the bills for the supplies as under:-
S.No. Bill Date Amount (Rs.)
1. 17.11.2020 55,556/-
2. 22.11.2020 56,700/-
3. 12.12.2020 44,887.50/-
4. 25.12.2020 21,905.10
5. 04.01.2021 87,907.68
6. 14.01.2021 35,910/-
Total 3,02,876.28/-
CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 2 of 10
2. (ii) It is further averred that the plaintiff is maintaining the account of the defendant in ordinary course of business thereby showing the goods supplied to the defendant and also the payments made by the defendant from time to time against the supplies and goods received by the defendant. According to books account of the plaintiff, a debit balance of Rs. 1,86,650/- upto the month of August, 2024 as detailed below:-
Balance price of the goods Rs. 1,37,876/-
supplied
Interest from 21.09.2021 to Rs. 48,774
31.08.2024 @ 12% per
annum
Total Rs.1,86,650/-
2. (iii) It is further averred that last payment was made on 20.09.2021 of Rs. 25,000/- and the plaintiff lastly supplied the goods vide invoice dated 14.01.2021 amounting to Rs. 35,910. The plaintiff demanded the balance amount from the defendant. The defendant avoided to make the balance payment to the plaintiff on one pretext or the other. It is further averred that in between, the defendant gave two cheques dated 12.09.2021 and 18.09.2021 amounting to Rs. 25,000/- each, drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank, 55, West Avenue Road, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi to the plaintiff but he could not encash the same on the request of the defendant. Thereafter, the plaintiff sent a legal notice dated CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 3 of 10 13.08.2024 to the defendant, however, defendant failed to make the payment. Hence, the present suit.
RELIEF:
3. Following reliefs have been sought on behalf of the plaintiff in the plaint:
(A) Pass a decree for recovery of Rs. 1,86,650/- alongwith future and pendent-lite interest @ 12% per annum in favour of plaintiff and against the defendant together alongwith pendentelite interest @ 18 % per annum and also interest @ 18% till the payment of the decreed amount.
(B) The costs of the suit. DEFENCE:
4. Despite service through electronic mode on 08.03.2025, none had appeared nor filed WS on behalf of defendant, right to file WS of defendant was closed and the suit was proceeded ex parte against the defendant vide order dated 18.08.2025.
ISSUES:
5. Since, the defendant was proceeded ex-parte, no issues have been framed in the present matter.CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 4 of 10
EVIDENCE:
6. To substantiate its case, Shri Ashok, Proprietor of plaintiff firm was examined by way of evidence affidavit Ex. PW1/A and has relied upon following documents:
(a) Ex. PW-1/1 being the computer generated copy of registration certificate of the plaintiff.
(b) Ex. PW-1/2 being the computer generated copy of particulars of the defendant.
(c) Ex. PW-1/3 being the bill dated 17.11.2020.
(d) Ex. PW-1/4 being the bill dated 22.11.2020.
(e) Ex. PW-1/5 being the bill dated 12.12.2020.
(f) Ex. PW-1/6 being the bill dated 25.12.2020.
(g) Ex. PW-1/7 being the bill dated 04.01.2021.
(h) Ex. PW-1/8 being the bill dated 14.01.2021.
(i) Ex. PW-1/9 being the computer generated copy of statement of account.
(j) Ex. PW-1/10 being the cheque bearing no. 000203.
(k) Ex. PW-1/11 being the cheque bearing no. 000204.
(l) Ex. PW-1/12 being the copy of legal notice.
(m) Ex. PW-1/13 being the copy of postal receipts.
(n) Ex. PW-1/14 being the original returned envelope of legal notice.CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 5 of 10
(o) Ex. PW-1/15 being the certificate u/s 65-B of Indian Evidence Act.
7. Vide separate statement of proprietor of plaintiff firm vide order dated 12.11.2025, PE was closed. Thereafter, matter was listed for ex parte final arguments.
FINAL ARGUMENTS:-
8. Ex-parte final arguments have been heard at length on behalf of the plaintiff.
FINDINGS OF THE COURT:-
9. It is settled principle of law that the burden to proof lies on the person who asserts the said fact. Section 104 Bhartiya Sakhshya Adhiniyam, 2023 defines "burden of proof" and lays down that the burden of proving a fact always lies upon the person who asserts the facts.
Therefore, the burden of proof always lies on the plaintiff initially to prove the facts alleged by him. This principle of law remains the same even in cases where the suit has been proceeded ex-parte qua the defendant. It was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Maya Devi V/s Lalta Prasad, (2015) 5 SCC 588, that the absence of defendant to contest the suit does not invite a punishment in the form of an automatic decree. Therefore, it is required that the case of CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 6 of 10 plaintiff must stands on its own legs. Plaintiff cannot take the advantage of the absence of defendant and cannot get a decree in his favour which otherwise he could not get, has the case been decided on merits.
10.The law with regard to burden of proof of plaintiff in case of ex-parte proceeding has been well settled in a plethora of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Though, the burden of proof on the plaintiff in ex-parte proceeding is not very heavy, but the necessity of proof by the plaintiff of his case to the satisfaction of the court cannot be dispensed with. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramesh Chand Ardawatiya v. Anil Panjwani, (2003) 7 SCC 350 explained the law with regard to burden of proof of plaintiff in an ex-parte suit. The observations of the Hon'ble Apex court may be reproduced herewith as follows:-
"Even if the suit proceeds ex parte and in the absence of a written statement, unless the applicability of Order 8 Rule 10 CPC is attracted and the court acts thereunder, the necessity of proof by the plaintiff company of his case to the satisfaction of the court cannot be dispensed with. In the absence of denial of plaint averments the burden of proof on the plaintiff company is not very heavy. A prima facie proof of the relevant facts constituting the cause of action would suffice and the court would grant the plaintiff company such relief as to which he may in law be found entitled. In a case which has proceeded ex parte the court is not bound to CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 7 of 10 frame issues under Order 14 and deliver the judgment on every issue as required by Order 20 Rule 5. Yet the trial court should scrutinize the available pleadings and documents, consider the evidence adduced, and would do well to frame the "points for determination" and proceed to construct the ex parte judgment dealing with the points at issue one by one. Merely because the defendant is absent the court shall not admit evidence the admissibility whereof is excluded by law nor permit its decision being influenced by irrelevant or inadmissible evidence."
11.In order to prove its case, proprietor of plaintiff Sh. Ashok Kumar has examined himself as PW-1 and relied upon the various documents including various invoices raised time to time. Plaintiff has also relied upon the computer generated copy of statement of account duly supported by certificate u/S 65B, IEA corresponding to Sec. 63 BSA which shows that outstanding balance as on date is Rs. 1,37,876.28/- and the last payment was made on 20.09.2021. Further, perusal of legal notice shows that demand was raised with the Defendant to make the payment of balance amount failing which interest @ 18% would be charged. However, no payment has been made till date.
12.As the defendants were proceeded ex-parte, the testimony of plaintiff remained unchallenged and unrebutted. The same is duly corroborated by relevant documents. Thus, there is nothing on record to disbelieve CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 8 of 10 the unrebutted testimony of the plaintiff's witness or to doubt the authenticity and veracity of the documents exhibited and proved on record.
13.Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the Plaintiff has been able to discharge his burden qua the entire claim of Rs. 1,86,650/- on the precipice of preponderance of probabilities. Accordingly, the plaintiff is held entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,86,650/- from the defendant.
14.The plaintiff has claimed pendentelite and future interest @ 12% p.a. This Court is of the considered view that if interest @ 9% p.a. is granted to the plaintiff, it would meet the ends of the justice. Therefore, interest is granted to the plaintiff @ 9% p.a. on the outstanding amount i.e. Rs. 1,37,876.28/- from the date filing of suit till its realization.
Relief:
15.In the light of the above discussion and reasons therein, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs. 1,86,650/- alongwith pendentelite and future interest @ 9% p.a. on the outstanding amount i.e. Rs. 1,37,876.28/- from the date filing of suit till its realization.
CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 9 of 1016.Costs of the suit are also awarded in the favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant.
17.Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
18.File be consigned to the record room after necessary compliance.
Digitally
signed by
RENU
Announced in the open RENU Date:
2026.02.18
14:08:13
Court on 18.02.2026 +0530
(RENU)
CIVIL JUDGE (NORTH)
ROHINI/DELHI/18.02.2026
CS SCJ 1003/2024 Ashok Kumar Vs. M/s Jai Shri Shyam Enterprises Page 10 of 10