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 …APPILANT
VERSUS
SH. SHYAMKUMAR L CHAUHAN …DEFENDANT
APPEAL UNDER ORDER 43 (1) ALONG WITH SECTION 151 CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE,
1905 FOR SEETING ASIDE AN INTERIM ORDER AGAINST THE APPELLANT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the appeal has been filed in the above captioned matter against the impugned order dated
22.03.2024, passed by the Civil Judge, Dwarka Courts and next date of hearing is 24.04.2024. A
copy of the 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 “Every Day Loan India” is a digital lending platform unit of the Appellate, that markets
personal loan products to the customers as per their financial requirements. The customers
accept all the ancillary Terms and Conditions provided by the provided by the websites for
seeking an Unsecured Loan by furnishing their income details and submitting appropriate KYC (
Know Your Customer) as required by the Plaintiff for their disbursal of the said Unsecured Loan
to the customers from the Bank Account of the Plaintiff as follows:
ACCOUNT NUMBER- 054705001873
ACCOUNT HOLDER’s NAME- GOODSKILL SECURITIES AND SERVICES LIMITED
IFSC CODE- ICIC000547
BRANCH- ICICI BANK LTD. VASANT VIHAR

4. 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.

5. That the Appellate issued Demand Notice dated 30.12.2024 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. A copy of Demand Notice
dated 30.01.2023 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE- B.

6. That Defendant failed to pay any amount even after several reminder and follow-up by the
Appellate. That on 12.12.2024, 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). Accordingly, the matter was put for
consideration on 19.12.2024 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. A copy of the order dated
19.12.2023 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE – C.

7. That the Ld. Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 issued summons for judgement as a part of
procedural technicalities as per ORDER XXXVII of Code of Civil Procedure,1908. A copy of
the order dated 13.02.2024 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-D.

8. It is submitted that on 26.02.2024, the defendant was duly served with summons for judgement.
However, as per ORDER XXXVII (3) of Code of Civil Procedure,1908 the defendant failed to
file leave to defend within 10 days of service of summons and failed to file the written statement
within limitation period.
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 issuance for summons for judgement
start negotiation the total outstanding loan amount with the Appellate via e-mail. A copy of the
written statement along with e-mail are 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. It is pertinent to mention herein
that the written statement is not only time barred but also the defendant failed to furnish an
application for Condonation of Delay along with written statement. 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 Judgeand 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 Ld. Court vided impugned order dated 22.03.2024 considered written statement as
leave to defend and fixed the above captioned matter for arguments for leave to defend.

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 provided in the provision.
 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.