Delhi District Court
Moti Lal Jain vs M/S Harish Chand Shiv Kumar And Ors on 10 March, 2025
-:: 1 ::-
IN THE COURT OF SH. KISHOR KUMAR, DISTRICT
JUDGE-04,NORTH DISTRICT : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
CNR No. DLNT01-010165-2022
CS No. 716/22
In the matter of :-
Moti Lal Jain
S/o Late Sh. Ram Gopal
R/o C-7, Janhit Apartments,
Sector-9, Rohini,
Delhi-110085 ..... Plaintiff
Versus
1.M/S Harish Chand Shiv Kumar
2. Mohit Goel
3. Shiv Kumar
4. Aman Goel All R/o 4058A, Naya Bazar, Delhi-110006 .....Defendants Date of Institution : 02.11.2022 Date of Ex. Parte Final Arguments : 10.03.2025 Heard Date of pronouncement of judgment : 10.03.2025 Final Outcome : Suit Decreed EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1. The present suit under Order XXXVII of CPC, 1908 for recovery of Rs. 7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lacs) and pre-
CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 1 of 6 Digitally signed by KISHOR KISHOR KUMAR Date: KUMAR 2025.03.10 16:51:18 +0530
-:: 2 ::-
litigation interest calculated @ 12 % per annum amounting to Rs. 2,70,000/- alongwith pendent-lite and future interest @ 12% per annum. However, on the statement made by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff, the present suit was converted into an ordinary suit vide order dated 07.11.2022.
2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the defendant no. 1 is a partnership firm by the name and style of Harish Chand Shiv Kumar dealing in the field of retail of pulses, grain and rice. The defendant no. 2 to 4 are the partners in the defendant no. 1 firm and are responsible and liable for the day to day affairs, business and actions of the defendant no. 1. it is averred that in the month of November, 2019, the defendants were in dire need of money and hence the defendants approached the plaintiff in November, 2019, at the aforementioned residence address of the plaintiff through one person namely Surender, who is known to the plaintiff, for taking an amount of Rs. 11 Lakh as loan. It is further averred that initially the plaintiff was not inclined to advance any loan whatsoever to the defendants but the defendants continuously persuaded the plaintiff to advance the said loan of Rs. 11 Lakhs. The defendants further lured the plaintiff into advancing the said loan amount on ground of giving handsome interest amount of Rs. 1% per month. It is further stated that the defendants further told the plaintiff that the aforementioned CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 2 of 6 Digitally signed by KISHOR KISHOR KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.03.10 16:51:26 +0530
-:: 3 ::-
Surender and the defendants are known to each other from past several years and Mr. Surender also vouched for the market reputation of the defendants. It is further stated that the defendants promised to repay the loan amount within 01 year from the date of advancement of loan.
3. It is further averred that keeping in mind the relations with Mr. Surender and being lured by the offers of the defendants, the plaintiff handed over his entire life saving to the defendants as loan in cash in the following manner:-
S. No. Loan amount (in Rs.) Date of advancement of loan
1. 4,00,000/- 09.11.2019
2. 5,00,000/- 09.11.2019
3. 2,00,000/- 21.11.2019
4. It is further averred by the plaintiff that the defendants in lieu of the aforementioned loan, issued three different acknowledgment letters cum promissory note for three different transactions in favour of the plaintiff on the letter head of the defendant no. 1 thereby acknowledging the receipt of the aforementioned payments. Out of the said Rs. 11,00,000/-, the defendants have already returned back the amount of Rs.
4,00,000/- (without interest) and as on date, an amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- is still due and pending to be paid back to the plaintiff against two different acknowledgment letters cum promissory CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 3 of 6 Digitally signed by KISHOR KISHOR KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.03.10 16:51:34 +0530
-:: 4 ::-
note. It is further averred that after the lapse of 01 year from the date of advancement of loan, the plaintiff tried to contact the defendants on many occasions but the defendants kept on avoiding the plaintiff on one pretext or the other. It is further averred that having no other alternative, the plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 26.08.2022 to the defendants but to no effect. Hence, the present suit.
5. It is seen from the record that defendants have been served by way of publication in the newspaper 'Veer Arjun' but they did not appear. No written statement has been filed by the defendants. Therefore, defendants have been proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 30.01.2025.
6. In ex parte plaintiff evidence, plaintiff/Sh. Moti Lal Jain has examined himself by way of affidavit in evidence Ex. PW1/A. He has relied on the following document:
1. Copy of promissory note dated 09.11.2019 & dated 21.11.2019 which is Ex.PW1/1 (colly.) (OSR).
2. Legal notice alongwith postal receipt which is Ex.PW1/2 (colly.).
7. Thereafter, on the statement of plaintiff, ex parte PE stood closed .
CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 4 of 6 Digitally signed by KISHOR KISHOR KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.03.10 16:51:43 +0530
-:: 5 ::-
8. I have heard ex-parte final arguments advanced by Ld. counsel for the plaintiff and have gone carefully through the material on record.
9. In C.S. Rowjee v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1964 AIR 962 it was held by the Apex Court that facts in the affidavit uncontroverted by opposite party can be deemed as admitted to rely. Further, in Sushma Berlia & Ors. vs Kamal Kumar & Ors., 2014 SCC OnLine Del it was observed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court that Testimony of plaintiff/PW-1 (Moti Lal Jain) has remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Adverse inference is to be drawn against the defendants for not contesting the suit on adjourned date and remaining ex- parte. There are no sound reasons to disbelieve the positive uncontroverted testimony of plaintiff/PW-1.
10. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the testimony of plaintiff witnesses remained unrebutted. As such this court has no reason to not believe the case of the plaintiff. Since the defendants did not cross examine the plaintiff witnesses nor led any evidence to prove their contentions and chose to remain ex parte, the evidence and documents produced on behalf of the plaintiff remained unchallenged. However, the interest @ 12% per annum is exorbitant one and rate of interest on the claimed CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 5 of 6 Digitally signed by KISHOR KISHOR KUMAR KUMAR Date:
2025.03.10 16:51:49 +0530
-:: 6 ::-
amount as 6% per annum would meet the ends of justice. Consequently, the plaintiff is held entitled for the relief as claimed in the present case.
11. In view of above, all these issues are decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Relief
12. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the suit of the plaintiff is decreed for a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization of decretal amount.
13. The plaintiff is entitled to recover costs of the suit from the defendant.
14. Decree sheet shall be prepared accordingly.
15. File be consigned to Record Room after due compliance.Digitally signed by KISHOR
KISHOR KUMAR
Date:
KUMAR 2025.03.10
Announced in open 16:51:57
+0530
Court on 10.03.2025 (Kishor Kumar)
DJ-04, North, Rohini Courts,
Delhi/10.03.2025
CS No. 5716/22 Moti Lal Jain Vs. M/s Harish Chand Shiv Kumar & Ors. Page: 6 of 6