In summary suits under Order XXXVII, defendants are entitled to unconditional leave to defend if they demonstrate triable issues, necessitating a full trial to resolve outstanding complexities.

JUDGMENT

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

1. The instant civil revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter "CPC") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"1. Allow the present petition and set aside the order dated 22.04.2022 passed in in CS No. 352/2020 titled Aparna Choudhrie Kala v. Vaibhav Kala . by the Additional District Judge- 04, South East, Saket Courts, New Delhi;

2. Issue a decree in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondent directing the Respondent to pay the Petitioner an amount of Rs 70,32,959/-;

3. Award interest at the rate of 18% per annum to the Petitioner on the amount of Rs 70,32,959/- from 31.07.2020 till the date of repayment;

4. Award costs of the suit in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondent; Pass any other order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interests of justice and equity."

FACTUAL HISTORY

2. The petitioner, who is a resident of Delhi, is a director and a shareholder of a company namely M/s Aqua Terra Adventures India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter "ATAIPL"). The respondent, who is the husband of petitioner is also a director and shareholder of ATAIPL.

3. As stated, during the years 2012 to 2015, the petitioner had advanced a loan of approximately amounting to Rs. 1.45 Crore to ATAIPL. Thereafter, during the years 2018-19 and 2019-20, a sum of Rs. 55 Lakhs was transferred by ATAIPL in to the joint bank account of the parties where the respondent is the primary holder of the said joint bank account. The petitioner alleges that the respondent, without the consent of the petitioner, unilaterally and unauthorizedly transferred the said amount of Rs. 55 Lakhs from the joint bank account for his own personal use in order to fulfil his liabilities towards third parties.

4. Subsequently, upon an enquiry by the petitioner, it was informed by the respondent via WhatsApp messages including the messages of 9th July, 2018 that the respondent needed the monies for his personal liabilities. It is also stated that the respondent did not inform that the monies transferred from ATAIPL to the joint account were towards repayment of the loan given by the petitioner to ATAIPL.

5. Thereafter, in the month of August, 2019, the petitioner questioned the movement of the monies, in and out of the joint account, without her consent and knowledge. Moreover, the petitioner categorically instructed the respondent to not make any more payments into the joint bank account.

6. In October 2019, the draft balance sheet of ATAIPL for the financial year 2018 - 2019 was shared with the petitioner and it has been stated that she was shocked to see that as per the contents mentioned therein, a sum of Rs 35 Lakhs of her loan to the company had been supposedly repaid to her during the year. Vide her email dated 23rd October, 2019, the petitioner requested that the balance sheet be corrected to this effect. The respondent did not change the entry and the petitioner refused to sign the balance sheet, as she had never received the repayment of her loan.

7. Further, when it was revealed to the petitioner that the monies were actually transferred towards repayment of the loan given by the petitioner to ATAIPL, the respondent assured her that the he would repay the amount of Rs. 55 lakhs within a short period of time, but to no avail.

8. Thereafter, vide email dated 28th October, 2019, the respondent acknowledged in writing that he owed a sum of Rs. 55 Lakhs to the petitioner and undertook to repay the same by 30th November, 2019.

9. Upon failure to repay the said amount of money to t