Delhi District Court
Shyam Kishore vs Pooja Shukla on 21 July, 2023
IN THE COURT OF SUMIT DASS, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE04, SOUTH WEST DISTRICT, DWARKA COURTS,
NEW DELHI.
CS No.03 of 2020
In the matter of:
Shyam Kishore
S/o Ashok Kumar Dubey
R/o WZ798, 3rd Floor,
Palam Village,
New Delhi110045. .....Plaintiff.
VERSUS
1. Pooja Shukla
D/o Awadh Lal Shukla,
2. Awadh Lal Shukla,
3. Sandhya Shukla,
W/o Awadh Lal Shukla
4. Shivam Shukla
S/o Awadh Lal Shukla
All r/o Flat No.101, Block No.8,
Ashoka Ratan, VIP Estate,
CS No.03/20 Page No. 1/8
Shankar Nagar, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh492001. ......Defendants.
Date of Filing : 06.01.2020
Date of Arguments : 11.07.2023
Date of Decision : 21.07.2023
JUDGMENT
1. Vide this judgment, I shall dispose off instant suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery of Rs.35,95,000/ along with interest against the defendants.
2. The facts as pleaded in the plaint are that plaintiff came into contact with defendant no.1 Pooja Shukla through website of jeevansaathi.com as he was searching for a girl for marriage purposes and both agreed to marry with each other. Soon defendant no.1 Pooja Shukla started asking money from the plaintiff stating that she has lost her job. It is further stated that defendant no.1 directly and under guidance and direction of other defendants who are her family members had demanded money and articles for establishing her career, doing educational course, preparation of competition examinations, losing of job, financial crisis, gifts, repayment of loan etc and in such a way defendants have looted Rs.26,00,000/ from the plaintiff and out of which Rs.16,00,000/ were looted by them by getting transfer of amount in their account from the CS No.03/20 Page No. 2/8 account of the plaintiff and by misusing of debit and credit cards and by taking Rs.10,00,000/ in cash for the purchase of valuable and costly gift articles including Iphones, gold articles and ornaments and many shopping in the malls on different dates and occasions in Delhi and Raipur as enumerated in details in para no.9A to 9Z of the plaint.
2.1 It is further stated that later on defendant no.1 had refused to marry the plaintiff. Plaintiff asked the defendants to return his money and all articles he had given to them but defendants refused to return anything. Plaintiff filed a complaint with Palam Village Police Station vide DD no.22B dated 12.05.2019 against the defendants but no action was taken. Plaintiff further filed complaints to police authorities at Raipur but there also no action was taken. Plaintiff had sent legal demand notice to the defendants asking them to return Rs.26,00,000/ but defendants did not return anything. Plaintiff has also filed a criminal case U/s 156 (3) CrPC against the defendants which is pending before the Court of Ld. MM, Dwarka Courts. The plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of Rs.35,95,000/ which includes Rs.26,00,000/ as principal sum and Rs.9,95,000/ as interest for the period w.e.f. 16.10.2016 to 23.12.2019.
3. Summons for settlement of issues were issued upon the defendants. Defendants were duly served but failed to appear. Hence, vide order dated CS No.03/20 Page No. 3/8 14.10.2022, the defendants were proceeded exparte.
4. Plaintiff Sh. Shyam Kishore entered into witness box as PW1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A. He relied upon following documents:
(1) Copy of photographs of all the defendants along with husband of defendant no.1 as Ex.Pw1/1 (colly), (2)Copy of chat held between plaintiff and all defendants as Ex.PW1/2 (colly), (3)Photocopy of courier receipts sending gift items to all the defendants as Mark PW1/A (colly), (4)Copy of complaint dated 30.05.2019 made to jeevansathi.com as Ex.PW1/3, (5)Copy of complaint dated 02.06.2019 sent to Delhi Police by email as Ex.PW1/4, (6)Copy of complaint dated 07.06.2019 sent to SHO, PS Palam Village as Ex.PW1/5 (colly), (7)Copy of complaint dated 15.06.2019 sent to SHO, Mowa Police station and to SHO, Telibandha Police Station at Raipur, Chhattisgarh along with postal receipts and tracking report as Ex.PW1/6 (colly), (8)Copy of legal demand notice dated 15.06.2019 sent to defendants along with postal receipts and tracing report as Ex.PW1/7 (colly), (9)Copy of complaint dated 17.06.2019 sent to SHO, PS Palam Village vide DD no.65B as Ex.PW1/8, (10)Copy of complaint dated 25.09.2019 sent by mail to CP, Delhi Police as Ex.PW1/9, (11)Copy of payment details submitted along with complaint dated 17.06.2019 to SHO Palam Village marked as Mark PW1/B, (12)Copy of statement of HDFC Bank, SBI for relevant period as Ex.PW1/10 (colly), (13)Copy of credit card statement of HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, CS No.03/20 Page No. 4/8 IndusInd Bank for relevant period as Ex.PW1/12 (colly), (14)Copy of PayTM statement for relevant period as Ex.PW1/12, (15)Copy of statement of ICICI Bank for the relevant period as Ex.PW1/13 (colly) (16)Affidavit/certificate U/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 as Ex.PW1/14.
Thereafter, PE was closed.
5. I have heard the arguments as well as perused the record. Written submissions have also been filed and I have perused the same.
6. In order to prove its case, plaintiff has relied upon various documents Ex.PW1/1 to Ex.PW1/14 as mentioned above.
7. All the above documents are duly available on record and have been proved by the plaintiff as per law. It has also come on record that plaintiff had also sent a legal demand notice dated 15.06.2019 which was served upon the defendants and the same has not been replied.
8. On the other hand, the defendants have failed to appear and substantiate their claim by crossexamining the witness of plaintiff and also leading evidence in support of their case and thus defendants have failed to create any dent to the evidence led by plaintiff in the present case. The documents relied upon by plaintiff have been duly proved by producing PW1. The testimony of CS No.03/20 Page No. 5/8 PW1 has remained unrebutted, unchallenged and uncontroverted as the defendants did not choose to appear and contest the matter and had not led any evidence in order to prove their stand.
8.1 Now coming to the communication which has been relied upon reveals a pattern that defendant no.1 had induced the plaintiff on the pretext of marriage to part with substantial amount for various reasons/purposes. The plaintiff has testified that he was entrapped by the defendant no.1 and made to part with substantial money and virtually he had himself to take loan via credit cards etc to fuel the demand of defendant no.1 which had increased with passage of time. So much so he was also compelled at the threat of suicide to hand over money and he had infact given all his salary/savings.
8.2 Now the suit has been filed in the year 2020 i.e. on 06.01.2020 now viz aviz amount before 06.01.2017 to my mind the same is barred by limitation. As such insofar as bank transactions from HDFC Bank as relied upon in the written arguments i.e. of Rs.20,000/, Rs.10,000/ and Rs.10,000/ are barred by limitation. Now coming to the transfers of money from account at Axis Bank, they all transferred post 06.01.2017; similarly from ICICI Bank the amount is post the said date, from State Bank of India also the transactions of amount is from the said date; the Paytm transfers and MobiKwik transfers are within time. Coming to credit card statements from Axis Bank, the first six CS No.03/20 Page No. 6/8 entries of Rs.15,750/, Rs.5,498/, Rs.3597/, Rs.10,000/, Rs.4851/ and Rs.4000/ are barred by limitation. Insofar as HDFC Bank credit card transactions are concerned first 12 transactions before 06.01.2017 are barred by limitation i.e. of Rs.21,00/, Rs.6249/, Rs.3800/, Rs.5000/, Rs,.1250/, Rs.1490/, Rs.3500/, Rs.4750/, Rs.2057/, Rs.924/, Rs.1500/ and Rs.5000/. Transactions of other IndusInd Bank, Citi Bank, ICICI Bank and SBI credit cards are all within time.
8.3 There is also a recovery of Rs.10 lakh which the plaintiff claims to have given in cash and on various occasions. I am not going to accede to same in absence of there being any documentary proof with regard to amount having been handed over in cash.
8.4 Excluding the said amount i.e. cash transaction and amount which is barred by limitation, the suit is decreed for a sum of Rs.14,32,662/ from date of filing of suit. Instead of giving interest entry wise i.e. presuit interest, I am giving a lumpsum of Rs.2,00,000/ as cumulative interest till filing of the suit.
Relief:
9. In view of the above findings, the suit of the plaintiff stands decreed. Decree of recovery for an amount of Rs.16,32,662/ is hereby passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant nos.1 to 4 alongwith pendentelite and future interest @ 9% per annum till realization. Cost is also awarded in favour CS No.03/20 Page No. 7/8 of the plaintiff. Decree shall be executed jointly and severally against all the defendants.
10. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly and file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court (Sumit Dass)
on 21.07.2023. Additional District Judge04
South West District, Dwarka Courts,
New Delhi.
CS No.03/20 Page No. 8/8