$~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(OS) 425/2022 YOGESH JINDAL .....Plaintiff Through: Appearance not given.

versus S.S. AGENCIES & ORS. .....Defendants Through: Mr. Ujjwal Jha and Mr. Rohan Gupta, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

O R D E R

% 16.02.2026 I.A. 19186/2023 & I.A. 19187/2023

1. I.A. 19186/2023 has been filed on behalf of Defendant Nos.1 and 2 under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of CPC for grant of unconditional leave to defend.

2. I.A. 19187/2023 has been filed on behalf of Defendant No.3 under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of CPC for grant of unconditional leave to defend. 3. The instant Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXXVII of CPC seeking recovery of Rs.3,83,87,177/-.

4. The facts, in brief, as stated in the Plaint are as follows:

a) It is stated that the Defendants approached the Plaintiff portraying that they have well established businesses in India and are looking for additional investments.

b)It is stated that the Defendants approached the Plaintiff seeking a loan.

Whereas, initially, the Plaintiff, on the requests and assurances of the Defendants, gave a friendly loan to the Defendants which was repaid.

c) Thereafter, in 2016, the Defendant Nos.2 and 3, who are partners in Defendant No.1/Firm, approached the Plaintiff seeking another friendly loan for their business and assured the Plaintiff that the same shall be repaid alongwith interest.

d)It is stated that believing on the assurances of the Defendants, the Plaintiff agreed to give a loan for a sum of Rs. 1,68,00,000/- (“loan amount”) in the name of Defendant No.1/Firm and it was agreed between the parties that the loan amount would carry interest @ 15% p.a. It is stated that said loan amount was paid to the Defendants through cheques and RTGS. Paragraph No.6 of the Plaint gives the details as to in what manner the loan amount had been extended to the Defendants. Paragraph No.6 of the Plaint is being reproduced as under:

e) It is stated that after the very first year of receiving the said loan amount, the Defendants defaulted in repayment of the interest amount to the tune of Rs.25,20,000/- for the period 2016-2017. It was informed by the Defendants to the Plaintiff that they have deposited the applicable TDS amount against the account of the Plaintiff to the tune of Rs.2,52,000/- and they shall pay the interest amount soon to the Plaintiff. It is stated that the Defendants assured the Plaintiff that there was some delay in making payments and it was wholly unintentional and they shall credit the interest amount in the Plaintiff’s account at the earliest.

f) It is further pointed out that defaults continued on behalf of the Defendants and the Plaintiff was being assured repeatedly that the interest amount which was due and payable on the loan amount would be cleared.

g)Whereas, the Defendants were depositing TDS amount on the interest amount payable year after year from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2019. It is stated that the Defendants also provided the Plaintiff with the Statement of Accounts for the period commencing from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2019, which clearly shows that the total interest amount due as on 31.03.2019, which according to the Plaintiff, is Rs.85,73,775/-

besides the Principal Amount of Rs. 1,68,00,000/-.

h)Thereafter, COVID-19 struck the country and the Defendants assured the Plaintiff again that after the lifting of the lockdown, all the due amounts would be paid.

i) It is stated that despite repeated requests of the Plaintiff, the Defendants have failed to pay the legal dues to the Plaintiff and, therefore, the present Suit has been filed by the Plaintiff seeking recovery of Rs.3,83,87,177/- which includes principal amount of Rs.1,68,00,000/- and interest amount of Rs.2,15,87,177/- from

01.04.2016 till 27.05.2022.

5. Paragraph No.14 of the Plaint states that the present Suit has been filed under the summary procedure of Order XXXVII of CPC as there is a clear and unequivocal admission of liability by the Defendants. It is