CNR No.

HRRH02-000917-2018 CS 580

Surender Singh Vs. Jai Kishan

Present : Sh. R.K. Nandal, counsel for plaintiff.

Sh. S.N. Kaushik, counsel for the defendant.

This order shall dispose of an application U/o XXXVII Rule 3(5) CPC to

grant permission to defend the suit moved by applicant/defendant.

2. It has been contended by the applicant/defendant that above noted suit

has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of an amount of ₹.4,00,000/- with interest

@ 2% per month, under order 37 CPC. The defendant has not been served as per the

provisions of order 37 Rule 3 sub rule 4 of CPC, as such the present suit is not

maintainable and the suit is not within the time, the same is time barred. The

defendant has not received ₹.4,00,000/- as loan from plaintiff @ 2% per month and

has not executed pronote and receipt as alleged by the plaintiff.

3. It is further submitted by the applicant/defendant that he has

replied the notice sent to him by the plaintiff. The defendant has not played fraud

with the plaintiff as the plaintiff has fails to mention as to how the defendant has

played fraud. The defendant have legal points to defend the suit, thus the suit is

without any cause of action. It is further contended that if the defendant is not

allowed to defend the case and the suit is decided without giving any opportunity of

being heard, the defendant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. With these

submissions, it is prayed that the application may kindly be allowed and leave of the

court to defend the suit may kindly be granted in favour of the applicant/defendant.
4. On notice, the aforesaid application was replied wherein it has

been contended that the suit is maintainable and the defendant has been served as per

the provisions of order 37 Rule 3 sub rule 4 of CPC. The suit is not time barred as the

same is filed well in time. Para no. 4 of the application is denied by stating that the

defendant has received sum of ₹.4,00,000/- as loan from the plaintiff @ 2% per

month and has executed pronotes and receipt in this regard in presence of witnesses.

5. It is further contended that the defendant is not entitled to defend

the case as the defendant has not raised any prima-facie triable issues and the plaintiff

is legally entitled to recover the amount towards the defendant. With these

submissions, request to dismiss the application has been made.

6. I have heard both the sides at length and perused the record

carefully.

7. It is contention of the applicant that if the defendant is not allowed

to defend the case and the suit is decided without giving any opportunity of being

heard, the defendant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. Apparently, the applicant

has not cited any specific ground for leave to defend the suit. However, considering

the fact that the amount involved in the present suit is considerable, it would be in the

interest of justice that the defendant be afforded opportunity to defend in the present

suit.

8. Consequently, the application in hand stands allowed and permission is

granted to the defendant to defend the suit subject to condition that he shall furnish

sufficient security to the tune of ₹.4,00,000/ within 15 days from passing of this

order. Accordingly, the application stands disposed off.

9. Nothing herein shall be deemed as expression of opinion on merits
of the case.

Maha Singh Stenographer Gr. III (Ashish Kumar Sharma)

ACJ(SD), Rohtak
(UID No. HR0266)
09.04.2019
Present : Sh. R.K. Nandal, counsel for plaintiff.
Sh. S.N. Kaushik, counsel for the defendant.

Vide my separate order of even date, the application U/o XXXVII Rule

3(5) CPC stands allowed. Now, the matter is adjourned to 22.4.2019 for furnishing of

security for an amount of ₹.4,00,000/ within 15 days as ordered.

Ashish Kumar Sharma

Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division),
Rohtak 09.04.2019

Maha Singh, Stenographer Gr. III

" I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document."
Digitally signed by MAHA
SINGH
Date: 2019.04.10 17:10:56
+0530