(1976) 4 SSC 687 titled as M/s. Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers vs. M/s. Basic Equipment Corporation and the judgment of this court reported in 129 (2006) DLT 94 titled as BPDL Investments (Pvt.)Ltd. vs. Maple Leaf Trading International (Pvt.)Ltd. to s

Delhi High Court · 09 Aug 2011 · 2011:DHC:8795

Indermeet Kaur

CM(M) No. 88/2010 & CM No. 1321/2010

2011:DHC:8795

civil appeal_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The court modified the security deposit condition imposed on the defendant for leave to defend a cheque dishonour suit, recognizing material alteration as a prima facie defence under Order 37 Rule 6(b) CPC.

Full Text

A-6
% 09.08.2011
Present: Mr. Pradeep Dewan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajiv
Samaiyar and Mr. Anupam Dingra, Advocates for the petitioners.
+CM(M)NO.88/2010 & CM No. 1321/2010
*
The order impugned before this court is the order dated
22.12.2009 vide which leave to defend was granted to the defendant; a condition had been imposed on him; he had been directed to deposit the cheque amounting to ^3,50,000/- as security within one month failing which the plaintiff would be entitled to a

JUDGMENT

forthwith. The application had been disposed of in the aforenoted terms. On the first day of hearing, impugned order had been stayed. None has appeared for the respondent although he had been appearing on the earlier hearings. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since there was material alteration in the cheque a prima facie defence had been made out by the defendant, entitling him for leave to defend unconditionally; he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court reported in

(1976) 4 SSC 687 titled as M/s. Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers vs. M/s. Basic Equipment Corporation and the judgment of this court reported in 129 (2006) DLT 94 titled as BPDL Investments (Pvt.)Ltd. vs. Maple Leaf Trading International (Pvt.)Ltd. to support this submission. 2011:DHC:8795 The contention of the defendant was that there was an alteration in the date of the cheque. The date of 14.11.2005 has been converted to read as 14.11.2006;the cheque is in fact invalid. Order 37 Rule 6 Sub Rule(b)grants a discretion to the court to impose any condition while granting leave to defend. In this factual scenario and keeping in view the submission made by the petitioner, the order is modified and the condition imposed upon the defendant directing him to deposit a sum ? 3,50000/- is modified; the sum of? 3,50,000/- is modified to? 2,00,000/- With these directions, this petition is disposed of. Copy of the order be sent to the Trial Coui INDERMEET KAUR,J. AUGUST 09,2011, rb CM./^OS^I/I ^ iytiv

(1976) 4 SSC 687 titled as M/s. Mechelec Engineers & Manufacturers vs. M/s. Basic Equipment Corporation and the judgment of this court reported in 129 (2006) DLT 94 titled as BPDL Investments (Pvt.)Ltd. vs. Maple Leaf Trading International (Pvt.)Ltd. to s

AI Summary

Full Text

JUDGMENT

Contact Us for a Free Consultation