R.K.JAIN vs SURAJ SUNAR & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgement delivered on: 25.06.2025 + FAO 93/2025 and CM APPL. 75246/2024 R.K. JAIN .....Appellant Versus SURAJ SUNAR & ORS. .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant : Appellant in person. For the Respondents : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J INTRODUCTION: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the orders dated 30.04.2022, 14.02.2024 and 10.05.2024, passed by the learned District Judge-04, Shahdara District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (‘Trial Court’) in CS No. 201/21 titled ‘R.K. Jain v. Suraj Sunar and Ors. (‘Suit’) 2. The learned Trial Court, vide order dated 10.05.2024, returned the plaint of the Appellant for lack of territorial jurisdiction to try the Suit Signature Not Verified FAO 93/2025 Page 1 of 9 Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:25.06.2025 15:59:52 (‘Impugned Order’). The Appellant has also challenged the orders dated 30.04.2022 and 14.02.24, whereby the application of the Respondents to enter appearance was allowed (‘Appearance Orders’). FACTUAL BACKGROUND: 3. The Appellant states that he lent ₹8,00,000/- to the Respondents at the rate of 2% interest per month, along with 2% penal interest on the outstanding amount, for the purpose of purchasing an immovable property. A promissory note dated 01.02.2016 was executed between the parties to this effect, with the last date of repayment of the loan amount along with interest, being 31.01.2018. 4. The promissory note was admittedly signed and executed in Jind, Haryana and accordingly, the Appellant initially filed a suit before the learned District Court in Jind, Haryana. However, the said suit was dismissed as withdrawn. 5. The Appellant then, on 04.03.2021, filed the Suit be