UNION BANK OF INDIA vs SHASHI MALIK

Judgment text excerpt

$~94 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RFA(COMM) 30/2023 UNION BANK OF INDIA .....Appellant Through: Mr. Samarendra Kumar, Adv. versus SHASHI MALIK .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 15.05.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 20 May 2022 passed by learned District & Sessions Judge (Commercial Court)1, Shahdara, in CS (COMM) 308/20202, whereby the learned Commercial Court has dismissed suit as having been instituted against a non-existent person and has mulcted the appellant with costs of ₹ 25,000/-. 2. CS (COMM) 308/2020 was instituted by the appellant against one Shashi Malik, proprietor of Shantanu Enterprises. 3. Two residential addresses of the respondent/defendant were provided by the appellant in the memo of parties, viz. (i) 204, Second 1 “the learned Commercial Court”, hereinafter 2 Union Bank of India v Shashi Malik Signature Not Verified Signed By:AAKANSHARFA(COMM) 30/2023 Page 1 of 7 SHARMA Signing Date:17.05.2025 12:59:24 Floor, Pankaj Tower, LSC Savita Vihar, Delhi-110092 and (ii) 1714, Sector 12, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. 4. By the suit, the appellant alleged that the respondent Shashi Malik had availed a loan from the appellant of ₹ 9,90,000/- under the Pradhan Mantri Loan Scheme, and had failed to repay the loan. As a result, the appellant had to classify the debt as a non-performing asset. 5. By the suit, therefore, the appellant sought recovery, from the respondent, of ₹ 11,19,609.70 along with pendente lite future interest at the rate of 11.85% per annum. 6. Summons in the suit were issued to the respondent. He could not, however, be served. The registered post sent to the respondent at the Savita Vihar address was received b