IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT

DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI

CASE NO. OF 2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s GOODSKILL SECURITIES AND SERVICES LIMITED …APPELLATE
VERSUS
SH. SHYAMKUMAR L CHAUHAN …DEFENDANT

LIST OF DATE & EVENTS

S.NO. DATE EVENTS

Date of Loan Disbursement
1. 3.07.2023
(Loan Amount- Rs.40,000 /-)
2. 31.07.2023 Due Date of Loan Repayment
3. 30.10.2023 Date of Legal Demand Notice
4. 13.11.2023 Date of service of Legal Notice via e-mail
Date of filing of suit under ORDER XXXVIII of Code
5. 12.12.2023
of Civil Procedure, 1908
Summons issued under ORDER XXXVIII of Code of
6. 19.12.2023
Civil Procedure,1908 for RC/SP/AD on filing of PF.
Defendant was served with summons in respect of the
7. 07.01.2024
above captioned recovery suit under ORDE XXXVIII
Defendant filed application for his appearance before
8. 10.01.2024
the Ld. Court
9. 13.02.2024 The Ld. Court issued Summons for Judgement
Defendant started negotiating the Loan Amount for
10. 24.02.2024
settlement.
11. 26.02.2024 The defendant was served with Summons for Judgement
11. 11.03.2024 Defendant filed Written Statement
Plaintiff filed reply to the written statement. Further
vide order dated 22.03.2024, the Ld. Court took the
12. 22.03.2024
written statement as Leave to Defend filed by the
defendant on record.
 IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE, SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI
CASE NO. OF 2024

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s GOODSKILL SECURITIES AND SERVICES LIMITED …APPELLATE
VERSUS
SH. SHYAMKUMAR L CHAUHAN …DEFENDANT
L.D.O.H-22.03.2024
N.D.O.H-24.04.2024
APPEAL UNDER ORDER 43 (1) ALONG WITH SECTION 151 CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE, 1908 FOR SETTING ASIDE AN INTERIM ORDER IN THE ABOVE
CAPTIONED MATTER

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the present appeal has been filed in the above captioned matter against the impugned order
dated 22.03.2024, passed by Ms. Chitranshi Arora, Civil Judge, Dwarka Courts and a copy of the
impugned order is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-A.

2. That the Appellate is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) registered with Reserve Bank
of India vide License No. B-14.01552 and dealing in the business of providing unsecured loans
through their websites to individual Customers and Businesses in India.

3. That the defendant approached the Appellate (i.e. NBFC) in respect of one of their product
services i.e. “Every Day Loan India” for availing an unsecured loan of amount of Rs. 40,000/-
(Rupees Forty Thousand Only) for his personal needs on urgent basis. That the total outstanding
amount is Rs. 51,200 (Rupees Fifty One Thousand Two Hundred Rupees) out of which
Rs.40,000/- is the principle amount and Rs.11,200/- is the interest amount.

4. That after due verification and due diligence the loan was disbursed to the defendant on
3.07.2023. It is submitted that the due date of the above-mentioned unsecured loan is
31.07.2023. That the defendant failed to repay the availed loan amount within the specified time
 i.e. 31.07.2023. It is pertinent to mention herein that the Appellate made regular follow-ups in
respect of repayment of the loan amount. However, despite of several reminder in respect of
repayment of loan, the defendant kept avoiding the repayment of the loan in one pretext or
another and eventually stop responding to the calls and messages of the Appellate. A copy of the
loan disbursed amount is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE- B.

5. That the Appellate issued Demand Notice dated 30.10.2023 for an outstanding amount of
Rs.51,200/- towards the recovery of the Unsecured Loans from the Defendant and the same legal
notice was duly served to the Defendant via e-mail dated 13.11.2023.

6. That Defendant failed to repay the loan amount even after the service of Legal Demand Notice.
That on 12.12.2023, Appellate initiated suit under ORDER XXXVII of Code of Civil
Procedure,1908 against the defendant in respect of total outstanding amount of Rs. 51,200
(Rupees Fifty One Thousand Two Hundred Only) before the Ld. Civil Judge, Dwarka Courts.
Accordingly, the matter was put for consideration on 19.12.2023 and the Ld. Court vide order
dated 19.12.2023 issued special summons to the defendant via all possible modes i.e. RC/SP/AD
on filing of PF/RC. A copy of the order dated 19.12.2023 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE –
C.

7. That as per order dated 13.02.2024, the defendant was served with summons in respect of the
above-mentioned cases on 07.01.2024 after filing of PF/RC by the Appellate and accordingly the
defendant filed application for appearance before the concerned court on within 3 days i.e. on
10.01.2024. A copy of the order dated 13.02.2024 is annexed as herewith as ANNEXURE-D.

8. That the Ld. Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 issued summons for judgement and the same
were served to the defendant on 26.02.2024. The defendant failed to file application for leave to
defend within 10 days as per ORDER XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure,1908.
In the matter of Rajiv Chugh v/s Gurpreet Singh [CM (M) 740/2012 & CM 11066-
11067/2012], The Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that “having regard to the nature of the
proceedings of Order 37 CPC, a valuable right accrues to the plaintiff in the event of defendant
failing to file leave to defend within 10 days of service of summons for judgment unless he
presents his case under the ambit of Rule 4 thereof.”
Further, In the matter of Balawant Singh v/s Harjinder Singh, [CR No. 4972 of 2018], held
that the “Since the suit was filed under Order 37 CPC, specific provision has been made for
 filing of written statement in a time bound manner. No such application has been filed by the
defendant/petitioner to defend the suit under Order 37 Rule 7 CPC for seeking leave of the
Court after showing sufficient cause for condonation of delay in entering appearance.”

9. It is important to mention herein that the defendant after service for summons for judgement on
26.02.2024 started negotiation in respect of total outstanding loan amount with the Appellate via
e-mail. A copy of the e-mail is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE- E (Colly).

10. That the Ld. Court vide impugned order dated 22.03.2024, admitted, accepted and considered
the written statement filed by the defendant as Leave to defend. Further, as per ORDER
XXXVII (3) of Code of Civil Procedure, the defendant failed to file leave to defend within
stipulated time of 10 days after service of summons. It is important to mention herein that the
case currently at the stage of for summons for judgement as per ORDER XXXVII (6) of Code of
Civil Procedure,1908, which provides as :
(6) At the hearing of such summons for judgement –
a) If the defendant has not applied for leave to defend, or if such application has been
made and is refused, the plaintiff shall be entitled to judgement forthwith; or
b) If the defendant is permitted to defend as to the whole or any part of the claim, the
Court or Judge may direct him to give such security and within such time as may be
fixed by the Court or the Judge
c) and that, on failure to give such security within the time specified by the court or the
Judge to carry out such other directions as may have been given by the Court or the
Judge, the Plaintiff shall be entitled to the judgement forthwith.

11. That the Hon’ble Trail Court erred in appreciating the facts of the case and gave undue benefit to
the defendant without any merit by considering and admitting the written statement filed by
defendant as leave to defend. It is submitted that ORDER XXXVIII of Code of Civil Procedure,
1908

12. That as per the procedural technicalities of ORDER XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908,
the above captioned matter is at the stage of summons for judgement as the defendant failed to
 file leave to defend in a specified time as provided in the provisions of Code of Civil
Procedure,1908.

PRAYER

That it is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble court may be please to:

a) To set aside the impugned order dated 22.03.2024

b) To pass an order for summons for judgement
c) To pass an order not to take written statement on record as leave to defend
d) To pass an order to close the right of the defendant to file leave to defend
e) To pass any such order in favor of plaintiff and against defendant may deem fit and proper under
the facts and the circumstances of the case.

PLAINTIFF

THROUGH

PLACE: NEW DELHI ADVOCATE KARTIK AGGARWAL ASSOCIATES

DATED: 05.04.2024 ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS
CH. NO. 202, LAWYERS
CHAMBERS BLOCK, ROHINI COURTS
DELHI- 110085
(M): 9999262652,7982149806
(E): advocatekartikaggarwal@gmail.com