Scribd
Upload
84 views3 pages

In The Court of Senior Civil Judge, Delhi

1) Suresh Kumar Malhotra filed a civil suit against Rajni Kumar for recovery of Rs. 33,661 for unpaid electricity and water consumption charges from when Rajni was a tenant in Suresh's property from November 1993 to January 1997. 2) According to a written lease agreement signed in November 1993, Rajni rented the property for nine months but continued occupying it past the term without paying usage charges. 3) Suresh is seeking to recover Rs. 33,661 plus 18% monthly interest from the date of filing the suit from Rajni.

Uploaded by

Ankita
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
84 views3 pages

In The Court of Senior Civil Judge, Delhi

1) Suresh Kumar Malhotra filed a civil suit against Rajni Kumar for recovery of Rs. 33,661 for unpaid electricity and water consumption charges from when Rajni was a tenant in Suresh's property from November 1993 to January 1997. 2) According to a written lease agreement signed in November 1993, Rajni rented the property for nine months but continued occupying it past the term without paying usage charges. 3) Suresh is seeking to recover Rs. 33,661 plus 18% monthly interest from the date of filing the suit from Rajni.

Uploaded by

Ankita
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

IN THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DELHI

CIVIL SUIT NO. 597/1997

(SUIT FOR RECOVERY UNDER ORDER XXXVII OF CPC, 1908)

IN THE MATTER OF: –

SURESH KUMAR MALHOTRA


S/O SH. RAJESH KUMAR MALHOTRA, R/O FLAT NO. C-471, SARITA VIHAR,
GROUND FLOOR, NEW DELHI
110004……………………………………………………………………….PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
RAJNI KUMAR
S/O SH. MAHESH KUMAR, R/O FLAT NO. C-470, SARITA VIHAR, GROUND FLOOR,
NEW DELHI
110004……………………………………………………………….DEFENDANT

Suit for recovery of Rs. 33,661/- (Rupees Thirty Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty One
only) under the Provisions of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure

Most respectfully showeth:-


Suresh Kumar Malhotra, the above name plaintiff states as follows:
1. The plaintiff is the owner of Flat no. C-470 at Sarita Vihar, Ground floor, New Delhi 110004
and defendant, Rajni Kumar Malhotra is the tenant in that flat.
2. Defendant approached the plaintiff and a written lease agreement between plaintiff and
defendant was signed on 26/11/1993 and defendant acquired the tenancy in that residential
flat for the period of nine months. According to agreement the rent of the flat was to be paid
at the end of term of nine months with all the residuary charges.
3. Even after the expiry of the term of tenancy, the defendant, Rajni kumar continued to occupy
the flat as a tenant till 11/01/1997. The electricity and water consumption charges of the use
of said premises till the date when tenant was residing in the flat was reasonably worth Rs.
33,661/-.
4. The defendant has not paid the electricity and water consumption charges for the period
starting from 26/11/1993 to 11/01/1997.
5. The cause of action for the suit arose on 26/08/1994 when the tenancy period comes to an
end and the defendant did not pay water and electricity consumption charges.
6. The plaintiff resides at Delhi and defendant lives as a tenant in Delhi. The cause of action
also arose at Delhi where defendant refused to pay the electricity and water consumption
charges. Hence this Hon’ble court is having the territorial jurisdiction.
7. The value of the subject-matter of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction is 33,661 rupees and
for the purpose of court fees and……..rupees.
8. The plaintiff claims 33,661 rupees for electricity and water consumption charges from
26/11/1993 to 11/01/1997 with the future interest of 18 % per month from the date of filing
of the present suit.
9. That the plaintiff has not claimed any relief in the plaint against the defendant that does not
fall within the ambit of Order XXXVII of CPC.
10. The Plaintiff has not filed any suit in any other court regarding same subject matter against
the Defendant and no suit is pending between the parties in respect of the relief being
claimed in this suit.

PRAYER
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed before this Hon’ble Court to:

A. Pass the decree for recovery of Rs. 33,661 along with future interest @ 18% per month
from the date of filling of present suit till its realization with cost in favour of the plaintiff
and against the defendant.
B. Pass any other decree/order or such other decrees, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit
and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in favour of the plaintiff and
against the defendant.

PLACE: Delhi. Plaintiff through Counsel

DATED: Vani Jindal

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy