RAJ KUMAR MAHESHWARI Vs. JYOTI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff has instituted the present suit for recovery of Rs 1,20,69,545/- along with interest at 12% per annum from the date of institution of the suit till realization. The suit was originally filed against three defendants. However, the plaintiff, as recorded in the order dated 27th March, 2008, did not press the claim against the defendant Nos 2 and 3 and they were deleted from the array of parties. The plaintiff claims that jewellery worth Rs 90,50,145/- was handed over by the plaintiff to the defendant No.1. The plaintiff besides the said amount has claimed Rs 30,19,400/- as interest accrued till the date of institution of the suit.

(2.) The plaintiff in the plaint itself stated that upon the plaintiff discovering that the defendant No.1 had cheated the plaintiff, the plaintiff filed a complaint against the defendants and which complaint was converted into FIR 755 of 30th December, 2004; all the defendants were arrested in the said case and while the defendant Nos 2 and 3 were granted bail, the defendant No.1 at the time of institution of the suit was in Jail in connection with the said case. The defendant No.1 was served with the summons of the suit in jail and while still in custody appeared before this court on 11th January, 2008 and sought time to file the written statement. However, the defendant, thereafter, neither appeared nor filed the written statement and was vide order dated 27th March, 2008 proceeded against ex parte. The plaintiff, as aforesaid, on 27th March, 2007 withdrew the case against the defendant Nos 2 and 3 without prejudice to his rights in the criminal case against the said defendants also. At this stage, I must record that though the defendant No.1 was proceeded ex parte, as aforesaid, but there is on the file of this court a handwritten letter dated 7th May, 2008 of the defendant No.1, forwarded to this court through Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar in which the defendant No.1 has requested for a date after 29th August, 2008 by which time she is expecting to be released from custody.

(3.) Upon the only defendant being proceeded ex parte, the plaintiff led his ex parte evidence and examined himself as PW1 and his father Shri Hari Prasad Maheshwari as PW2.