T SUKENDER REDDY Vs. M SURENDER REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition arises out of an order passed by the Court below on a petition filed under Order 37 Rule 3(5) CPC granting leave to defend the summary suit (O.S.No, 1746 of 1996) on condition of the petitioner- defendant depositing half of the suit amount in the Court, which should not however be withdrawn by the respondent-plaintiff.

(2.) The said suit was filed by the respondent-plaintiff under Order 37 Rule 2, C.P.C. on the basis of the promissory notes alleged to have been executed by the petitioner-defendant, for recovery of Rs. 1,36,000/-, in which the petitioner-defendant, filed an application seeking leave to defend the said suit. The petitioner-defendant admitted the execution of the suit promissory notes. According to him, he borrowed the amount five years back and at that time the respondent-plaintiff obtained his signatures on some blank stamped pronotes, receipts and a blank cheque and, subsequently, he repaid the said loan, but the respondent-plaintiff with a mala fide intention did not hand over the said papers and used them for filing the said suit.

(3.) The trial Court after considering the entire material on record came to the conclusion that prima facie there is a triable issue in the suit and that the burden of proving the allegations lies on the petitioner. The trial Court held that having regard to the execution of the pronotes by the petitioner-defendant and in view of his burden to rebut the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, he shall deposit half of the suit amount, which shall not be withdrawn by the respondent-plaintiff.