Case Note & Summary
The plaintiff, SKF India Ltd., filed a summary suit against the defendant, Banarasi Lal Madan, for recovery of Rs. 1,28,80,060.87 based on invoices, an admission of liability, and dishonoured cheques. The court granted conditional leave to defend on deposit of Rs. 50 lacs. The defendant deposited Rs. 10 lacs initially and the balance of Rs. 38,73,250.55 pursuant to a Division Bench order. The plaintiff filed a notice of motion seeking withdrawal of the deposited amount. The court allowed the withdrawal, directing the plaintiff to furnish security for the amount. The court reasoned that the deposit was a condition for leave to defend and the plaintiff is entitled to the amount pending final adjudication.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Summary Suit - Conditional Leave to Defend - Deposit of Amount - Withdrawal by Plaintiff - The plaintiff filed a summary suit for recovery of money. The court granted conditional leave to the defendant to defend the suit on deposit of Rs. 50 lacs. The defendant deposited the amount in installments. The plaintiff sought withdrawal of the deposited amount. The court allowed the withdrawal, holding that the deposit was made as a condition for leave to defend and the plaintiff is entitled to the amount subject to furnishing security. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the amount deposited by the defendant as a condition for leave to defend, pending final disposal of the suit.
Final Decision
Notice of Motion allowed. Plaintiff permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs. 48,73,250.55 deposited by the defendant together with interest accrued, subject to furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Prothonotary and Senior Master.
Law Points
- Conditional leave to defend
- deposit of amount as condition
- withdrawal of deposit by plaintiff
- Order VI Rule 17 CPC
- Section 151 CPC
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (03) 115
Notice of Motion No. 310 of 2010 in Summary Suit No. 2183 of 2003
Mr. Cyrus Ardeshir i/b. Madekar & CO. for the Plaintiffs, Mr. Tushar Bhavsar i/b. Mr. Manoj Bhatt for the Defendant
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Summary suit for recovery of money based on invoices, admission of liability, and dishonoured cheques.
Remedy Sought
Plaintiff sought withdrawal of amount deposited by defendant as condition for leave to defend.
Filing Reason
Defendant failed to pay the amount due under invoices and cheques.
Previous Decisions
Conditional leave to defend granted on deposit of Rs. 50 lacs; extension of time granted; appeal filed; Division Bench directed deposit of balance amount.
Issues
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the amount deposited by the defendant as a condition for leave to defend pending final disposal of the suit.
Submissions/Arguments
Plaintiff argued that the deposit was made as a condition for leave to defend and the plaintiff is entitled to the amount.
Defendant opposed the withdrawal, but the court found no valid objection.
Ratio Decidendi
The amount deposited by the defendant as a condition for leave to defend is not a security for the defendant but is available to the plaintiff pending final adjudication, subject to furnishing security.
Judgment Excerpts
By this Notice of Motion, Plaintiffs have applied for an order of withdrawal of a sum of Rs.48,73,250.55 deposited by the Defendant in this Court together with interest accrued thereon from the date of deposit till payment on such terms and conditions as this Court may deem fit.
Procedural History
Plaintiff filed Summary Suit No. 2183 of 2003. Summons for judgment No. 382 of 2004 was taken out. On 26 September 2005, conditional leave to defend was granted on deposit of Rs. 50 lacs. Defendant sought extension and deposited Rs. 10 lacs. Defendant appealed (Appeal No. 991 of 2005) and Division Bench on 23 January 2006 directed deposit of balance Rs. 38,73,250.55. Plaintiff filed Notice of Motion No. 310 of 2010 for withdrawal of the deposited amount.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order VI Rule 17, Section 151
