Delhi District Court
Sushila vs Raj Kumar on 5 February, 2020
IN THE COURT OF SH HARGURVARINDER SINGH JAGGI,
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE - 02, SOUTH WEST DISTRICT,
DWARKA COURTS, DELHI
CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018
CNR No.DLSW010187682018
IN THE MATTER OF:
Sushila
W/o Mr. Basant
R/o H.No.109, Amberhai village,
Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 ... Plaintiff
Versus
Raj Kumar
S/o late Tej Ram
R/o 4/1, Tajpur Khurd,
South West Delhi, New Delhi ... Defendant
Date of institution of suit: 02.11.2018
Date of judgment reserved: 25.01.2020
Date of pronouncement of judgment: 05.02.2020
EX PARTE JUDGMENT
1.The plaintiff, namely, Sushila (hereinafter "plaintiff") has preferred a money recovery suit against the defendant, namely, Raj CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018 Page No. 1/5 Kumar (hereinafter "defendant") for an amount of ₹6,70,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and seventy thousand only).
2. The case urged by the plaintiff in her plaint is that she was introduced to the defendant as a property dealer, by her friend named Malti. The defendant showed number of plots of land to the plaintiff. The plaintiff purchased a plot of land ad-measuring 27 yd², out of Khasra No. 183, Khata No. 91, village Tajpur Khurd, Delhi (hereinafter "suit property") for a total consideration of ₹6,30,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and thirty thousand only). On payment of the total sale consideration by the plaintiff to the defendant, the defendant executed documents - agreement to sell, general power of attorney, affidavit, will, receipt and possession letter all dated 04.10.2016. The plaintiff incurred an amount of ₹40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand only) for construction of a boundary wall. The defendant and his associates illegally and by use of force demolished the boundary wall constructed by the plaintiff.
3. On 25.09.2017, the employer of the plaintiff, namely, Naveena Bedi contacted the defendant telephonically and requested him to hand over the possession of the suit property or in the alternative return the money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant assured that he would return the money or give an alternate plot of land to the plaintiff. It is averred in the plaint that the defendant also informed that the plot sold by him to the plaintiff did not belong to him.
4. With no resolution, the plaintiff was constrained to lodge a complaint with the local police station Chhawla vide Daily Diary No. CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018 Page No. 2/5 34A dated 19.03.2018. On 26.06.2018, the defendant gave an undertaking before the SHO/IO, police station Chhawla to either return the money to the plaintiff or give an alternative plot within one month. However, the defendant failed to honour his undertaking.
5. The plaintiff on 25.05.2018 issued a notice to the defendant demanding handover of the physical and vacant possession of the suit property or to return an amount of ₹6,70,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and seventy thousand only) along with interest @18%p.a. The defendant did not respond to the aforesaid notice.
6. The plaintiff has urged in the plaint that the defendant is an influential person having police and political connections. The plaintiff was also constrained to lodged a complaint with the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate. The concerned Investigation Officer (IO) filed a status report dated 18.10.2018, wherein it was stated that the defendant could not be contacted, as he was in the judicial custody.
7. Hence, the present suit for recovery of money.
8. The plaint was preferred by the plaintiff on 01.11.2018. On 02.11.2018, the suit was instituted and summons for settlement of issues were issued to the defendant returnable for 14.01.2019. Despite service of summons, the defendant failed to appear before the court on 14.01.2019 and the defendant was accordingly proceeded ex parte.
9. The plaintiff led ex parte evidence. The plaintiff stepped into the witness box, relied upon and proved the following documents:
CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018 Page No. 3/5S.No. Exhibit Mark put Description and Date, if any of the on the Document document
1. Ex.PW1/1(Colly.) Agreement to sell, General power of attorney, Affidavit, Will, receipt, (OSR) possession letter with ID proof
2. Ex.PW1/5 Legal Notice dated 25.05.2018
3. Ex.PW1/6, Status report filed by IO, PS Chhawala before the Court of Mr. Santosh Kumar, Ld. MM - South West District, Dwarka.
Note: The documents marked as Ex.PW1/2, Ex.PW1/3 and Ex.PW1/4 by the plaintiff were de-exhibited during the testimony of PW1 on 17.05.2019 and were marked as Mark-A, Mark-B and Mark-C respectively.
10. With the averments in the plaint being unrefuted and no rebuttal evidence on behalf of the defendant, the suit of the plaintiff is bound to be decreed on account of default of appearance on behalf of the defendant. This court observes that though the plaintiff has produced the primary documents - agreement to sell, general power of attorney, affidavit, will, receipt and possession letter all dated 04.10.2016, but no evidence has been led with regard to the plaintiff having incurred an expense of ₹40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand only) towards the construction of a boundary wall. Thus, the inclusive claim of ₹40,000/- (Rupees Forty thousand only) is to be declined.
11. This Court finds and rules that the plaintiff is entitled for a money decree of ₹6,30,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and thirty thousand only). However, the interest sought by the plaintiff @18% per annum is found to be on the higher side. This court observes that the ends of CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018 Page No. 4/5 justice would be met if the interest @7%p.a. is awarded to the plaintiff on the amount of ₹6,30,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and thirty thousand only).
12. Accordingly, the plaintiff is held entitled for a money decree of ₹6,30,000/- (Rupees Six lakhs and thirty thousand only) along with interest @7%p.a. w.e.f. 25.09.2017 i.e. date of the undertaking given by the defendant until its actual realisation. The costs of the suit are also awarded to the plaintiff. Suit stands decreed. Let money decree be drawn in above terms.
13. File be consigned to record room only after due compliance and necessary action, as per Rules. Digitally signed by HARGURVARINDER HARGURVARINDER SINGH JAGGI SINGH JAGGI Date: 2020.02.05 16:37:15 +0530 Pronounced in the open Court (Hargurvarinder Singh Jaggi) on February 05, 2020 Addl. District Judge-02 South West District Dwarka Courts Complex, Delhi CS DJ ADJ No. 1139/2018 Page No. 5/5