HARI KISHAN Vs. FORTUNE TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this judgment, I.A. No. 4397/2001, being an application moved tinder Order XXXVII 3(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure for grant of leave to contest the suit, is being decided.

(2.) The facts culminating in filing of the present application for leave to contest may be briefly noted:

(3.) Before adverting to the application for leave to contest and considering the merits thereof, the proceedings in the present suit, may be noted. (i) Plaintiff had initially impleaded Sh. Anil Khurana as defendant No. 3. It was brought to the attention of the plaintiff that impleadment of defendant No. 3, was neither on the basis of a partner of defendant No. 1 nor was he signatory to the cheque on the basis of which suit had been filed under Ordef XXXVII, CPC. Plaintiff sought leave to amend the plaint. IA.No. 781/2000 under Order I Rule 10, CPC and Order VI Rule 17, CPC was moved. The application was allowed vide order dated 25.1.2000. Plaintiff moved IA.No. 9211/2000 for issuance of summons of judgment, which were duly issued. Defendant entered appearance. Plaintiff claimed that appearance was not entered within time and moved IA.No. 575/2001, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.4.2001. Upon summons for judgment being issued, defendant filed lA.No. 4397/2001, seeking leave to contest. Counsel for the parties were heard on 15.5.2003 and the judgment was reserved.