JACKIE VERMA & ORS. vs SANJAY SHARMA

Judgment text excerpt

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 10.09.2025 + C.R.P. 250/2025 & CM APPL. 55036/2025 JACKIE VERMA & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Ayush Shrivastava, Mr. Krishnesh Bapat & Ms. Sneha P. Mandal, Advs. versus SANJAY SHARMA .....Respondent Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. This Court by an order dated 02.09.2025 passed the following directions: "3. The present Petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] impugning the order dated 15.07.2025 passed by the learned Trial Court [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, the Application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC filed by the Petitioners/Defendants has been dismissed. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners has taken two grounds of challenge in the Application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. Firstly, he submits that the plaint is barred by law citing the Section 269SS and 269ST of the Income Tax Act, 1961 since the loans were given of an amount in the sum of Rs. 20,000/-. The second ground that has been taken by the Petitioners was that there is no cause of action to file the plaint and that the plaint should be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. 5. Concededly, the plaint that has been filed is a suit for recovery of money. 6. It is the case of the Plaintiff in the plaint that the loan in the sum of Rs. 12,00,000/- was taken by the Defendants from the Plaintiff since they Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Date:13.09.2025 C.R.P. 250/2025 Page 1 of 7 14:06:06 had friendly relations with each other. The loan amount was, however, not returned and instead two cheques were issued both dated 24.12.2022