Delhi District Court
Sunil J Mathews vs Paritosh Jain on 16 January, 2026
IN THE COURT OF DR. PANKAJ SHARMA, DISTRICT JUDGE - 02/
WAQF TRIBUNAL, NEW DISTRICT DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE
COURTS, NEW DELHI
Civil Suit No. 1/24
CNR No. DLND01- 011043-2023
In the matter of :
Sunil J. Mathews
S/o K. Mathews,
R/o K-204, Supertech Ecociti
Sector-137, Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar
Uttar Pradesh-201304
Also At:
114, Lawyers' Chamber
R/K. Jain Block,
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi-110 001 ....Plaintiff.
Versus
Paritosh Jain
S/o Late Sh. Surindra Kumar Jain
R/p 1284, ATS Village, Sector-93A
Noida, 201304 ....Defendant
Email: Paritoshjain62@gmail. Com
(M) 8130311133
Date of institution of the suit : 03.01.2024
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 1 /10
Final Arguments Heard on : 16.01.2026
Date of Judgment : 16.01.2026
Suit for recovery of Rs. 19,70,000/- alongwith cost, pendenlite and future
interest
EX-PARTE JUDGMENT :
1.Vide this judgment, I shall dispose off the suit for recovery of Rs.19,70,000/- alongwith interest 9% p.a. w.e.f. 30.12.2022 till the date of realization of amount with legal cost of the instant suit.
2. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
2.1 It is averred in the plaint that the instant suit is occasioned as a result of the continued willful non-payment by the defendant of the legal fees due to the plaintiff's office, who was engaged in pursue legal cases in Supreme Court of India and before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) as well as legal advice on other cases related to defendant and its legal family members. It is averred in the plaint that plaintiff is an advocate by profession and is currently regularly practicing in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and Supreme Court of India and he is an established legal counsel in Delhi and 22 years experience at the bar and also the life member of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and has had a successful career as per true copies of the Curriculum Vitae.
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 2 /10 2.2. It is further averred that defendant is a businessman, whose wife Seema Jain knew the plaintiff through a common circle of friends. It is further averred that in the discussions with the plaintiff, which started in February 2019, the defendant told that they had a sum total of Rs.1.5 crores stuck in some disputes with a builder, the defendant further confided in the plaintiff and conveyed that he was wiling to sell at a loss due to his desperate financial situation. It is further averred in the plaint that due perusal of the documents and internal deliberations, the plaintiff advised him to file a case against the builder rather than taking a loss and it took several phone calls by the plaintiff to convince the defendant as to how filing a case would be difficult but a better option to opt for. It is further averred that it is made clear by the plaintiff to the defendant that recovering of amount from the builder was going to be very touched but also assured the dedicated commitment of his legal services and defendant agreed to follow the legal way to resolve the dispute. It is further averred that defendant also informed the petitioner of his financial condition and requested if the petitioner could pursue the cases and render legal services of deferred payment basis since the defendant and his wife were common friends of counsel. It is further averred that plaintiff agreed to this as a favour to them as his legal fees was concerned.
2.3 It is further averred that after discussion, conference calls, research and deliberations, a consumer complaint was filed against Jaiprakash Associates Limited (JAL) at National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) on 15.05.2019, following which, the plaintiff made his CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 3 /10 first of several appearances before the NCDRC on 15.05.2019 in the dispute of case titled as Paritosh Jain Vs. the JAL. It is further averred that after extensive research alongwith some heavy readings, the plaintiff filed a rejoinder to further the legal proceedings and this was followed by consistent research, communications, filings and about a dozen appearances before the NCDRC wherein the plaintiff put in all his time and effort from 07.02.2019 to 11.11.2022.
2.4 It is further averred that the matter then was taken up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court by JAL, wherein the plaintiff with utmost dedication, prioritized and prepared for the said matter and it is tedious task that involved plaintiff to get Hon'ble (former) Justice Hemant Gupta recused concerning his prior connection with the defendant. It is further averred that the plaintiff then got the matter listed early, within a week's time with accurate and articulate briefing, the plaintiff got the Hon'ble Supreme Court to pass the order in defendant's favour. It is further averred that since the appeal made by JAL stood dismissed, the plaintiff filed an execution petition immediately. It is further averred in the plaint that this entire scenario reflects nothing but the relentless services offered to the defendant, through which a huge monetary profit was made and enjoyed, NOC, engage new counsel, subway contact, lease agreement.
2.5 It is further averred that defendant made a profit amounting to over Rs.2.5 crores due to the diligent and sincere legal services offered to by the CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 4 /10 plaintiff. It is further averred that plaintiff legally advised not only the defendant concerned to his disputes but also the family of defendant benefited from the services diligently offered by the plaintiff for the entire duration of JAL dispute from 07.02.2019 to 11.11.2022. It is further averred that plaintiff in his complete professional capacity offered the valuable advice to defendant's family members and these disputes inter alia included legal advice on subway contract, lease agreement and other family disputes. It is further averred that defendant deliberately chose to not make the complete payment against the professional services he utilized for the above-mentioned duration.
2.6 It is further averred that defendant via mail dated 18.09.2022 informed about the termination of plaintiff's services and he went ahead to engage another lawyer without the NOC and refused to take plaintiff's services. It is further averred that the plaintiff was blocked by the defendant to avoid any communication, whatsoever.
2.7 It is further averred that for the services rendered by the plaintiff from 07.02.2019 to 11.11.2022, the defendant was liable to pay a total sum of Rs.26,70,000/-. It is further averred that an amount of Rs.7,00,000/- had been received by the plaintiff on 18.04.2022 and the amount of Rs.19,70,000/-
remains due to his office and memo of fees alongwith the excel worksheet for legal services rendered had already been sent to the defendant via mail on 30.12.2022.
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 5 /10 2.8 It is further averred that via the same mail dated 30.12.2022, the plaintiff
gave an additional time till 14th January to complete the pending amount concerning the professional legal advice rendered to the defendant.
2.9 It is further averred that several communications and multiple reminders requests made for the rightful amount, the defendant has deliberately behaved in a negligent manner and plaintiff warned the defendant about initiating the legal proceedings but there has been no solid confirmation about the remaining amount. It is further averred that plaintiff also made to known to common friends of both petitioner and defendant, so that amicable settlement could be done but the defendant did not bother to even respond.
2.10 It is further averred that cause of action first arose in Delhi in 2019 and connected till date when the defendants approached the plaintiff to engage him to do matters in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and at National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). It is further averred that cause of action continued and again arose on 30.12.2022 when the plaintiff sent a legal notice to the defendant to make pending and balanced legal fees. It is further averred that petitioner has given more than enough time to the defendant to make full payment and was even opened to an amicable settlement, however the defendant chose not to respond at all. It is further averred that defendant shows no signs of communicating back or making the payment against the services rendered. Hence the present suit. Accordingly a prayer has been made to pass a decree for Rs.19,70,000/- alongwith interest @9% per annum w.e.f.
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 6 /10 30.12.2022 till the date of realization of amount alongwith the legal costs of the instant suit.
3. Thereafter vide separate statement dated 03.01.2024 of the counsel for plaintiff, the present suit has been converted into an ordinary recovery suit. Thereafter summons of the suit was directed upon the defendant and same was served upon the defendant through publication vide order 04.11.2024. Thereafter vide order dated 20.12.2024, the defendant was proceeded ex-parte.
4. In order to prove its case, plaintiff has examined himself as PW-1. He tendered his evidence by way of affidavit as Ex.PW1/A. In his affidavit, PW-1 has reiterated the facts mentioned in the plaint and put reliance on the following documents : -
1. True copy of email dated 07.02.2019 as Ex.PW1/1;
2. True copies of the emails sent by defendant sharing the requisite documents as Ex.PW1/2 to Ex.PW1/5;
3. True copies of the emails sent by the defendant as Ex.PW1/6 to Ex.PW1/14;
4. True copies of the correspondence as Ex.PW1/15 to Ex.PW1/22;
5. True copies of the correspondence from the defendant, Diagnostic reports and the application as Ex.PW1/23 to Ex.PW1/24;
6. True copies of the correspondence of the defendant regarding the rejoinder and evidence by way of affidavit as Ex.PW1/25 to Ex.PW1/26;
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 7 /10
7. True copy of correspondence with defendant regarding the judgments, legal notices, written submissions and objections to recall of order as Ex.PW1/27 to Ex.PW1/33;
8. True copies of the correspondence between me and defendant regarding video conference of matter for court proceedings as Ex.PW1/34;
9. True copy of the various correspondence related to the legal notices, complaint petition and written submissions as Ex.PW1/35 to Ex.PW1/39;
10.True copy of the email correspondence with defendant, the opposite counsel and the Hon'ble NCDRC orders and legal documents as Ex.PW1/40 to Ex.PW1/52;
11.True copy of orders passed by Hon'ble NCDRC as Ex.PW1/53;
12.True copy of decree passed by Hon'ble NCDRC in CC No.760 of 2019 as Ex.PW1/54 to Ex.PW1/59;
13.True copy of virtual hearing by Hon'ble NCDRC in EA No.230/2021 emails entailing the documents with respect to NCDRC orders, interest calculation and bank account details as Ex.PW1/61 to Ex.PW1/63;
14.Copy of bank NOC and liabilities, details of interest calculation and email to JAL mentioning the shortfall of payment as Ex.PW1/64 to Ex.PW1/74;
15.True copy of email entailing the settling the issue of outstanding legal fees amicably along with revised demand notice as Ex.PW1/77;
16.True copies of all the orders passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in CA No.(s) 7012-7013/2021 as Ex.PW1/78 to Ex.PW1/79;
17.True copy of the Curriculum Vitae, Brief Profile and Firm Profile of the CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 8 /10 plaintiff as legal counsel as Ex.PW1/80.
18.Certificate U/s 63 of BSA in support of the documents as Ex PW-1/81.
19. Further the true copies of demand notice, details memo of worksheet and WhatsApp Chat as Ex PW-1/75 and Ex Pw-1/76.
5. Thereafter, PE was closed in view of the submission of the plaintiff vide order dated 04.06.2025 and matter was posted for ex-parte final arguments.
6. I have heard the counsel for the plaintiff and have gone through the record carefully.
7. After being served, the defendant has not appeared and accordingly, he was proceeded ex-parte in the present case vide order dated 20.12.2024. Evidence produced by the plaintiff on record is un-rebutted and controverted. Plaintiff has established his case by way of documents exhibited in his evidence which remained un-controverted and unrebutted, therefore, there is no doubt that plaintiff is entitled for the sum claimed. Therefore, there is no doubt that invoice pertains towards the profession fees and services rendered by the plaintiff as an advocate which remained unpaid.
8. The suit is within time. Further, the defendant has failed to cause any dent in the case of the plaintiff in any manner and in fact had chosen to efface themselves from the proceedings by remaining ex-parte. The testimony CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 9 /10 of PW1 has remained unrebutted, unchallenged and uncontroverted as the defendant did not choose to contest the matter.
9. In view of the afore-said discussions, the plaintiff has proved its case. Plaintiff is held entitled for recovery of damages for an amount of Rs.19,70,000/- together with pendenlite and future interest @ 9% P.A from the defendant. Costs of the suit be also awarded to the plaintiff. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
10. File be consigned to Record Room after necessary compliance.
Digitally signed by PANKAJ PANKAJ SHARMA
SHARMA Date:
2026.01.16
14:15:16 +0530
Announced in the open court on (Dr. Pankaj Sharma)
16.01.2026 DJ-02 & Waqf Tribunal
NDD/PHC/ND/ 16.01.2026
CS No. 1/24 Sunil J Mathews Vs. Paritosh Jain 10 /10