MODI RAM Vs. SUGAN BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) with a prayer that the order dated 9-12-2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Badi Sadri whereby the defendants were asked to pay Rs, 1750/- as stamp duty and order dated 18-12-2003, by which right of the defendants to defend the suit was closed as defendants did not comply with the order dated 9-12-2003 be quashed and set aside.

(2.) It arises in the following circumstances : (i) That respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit against defendants under Order 37, CPC for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 34.730/- along with interest @ 24% per annum on 2-7-2002. (ii) On receiving the summons of the suit on 17-1-2003, the defendants-applicants moved an application under Order 37, Rule 2, CPC on 27-1-2003 for allowing the defendants-applicants to defend the suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants. (iii) The application filed by the defendants under Order 37, Rule 2, CPC was allowed by the learned trial Court through order dated 15-11-2003 on the condition that the defendants would submit indemnity bond as well as surety bond for a sum of Rs. 35.000/- within 7 days of the order. (iv) In compliance to the order dated 15-11-2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge, the defendants (applicants) submitted the indemnity bond as well as surety bond on 21-11-2003 before the trial Court. (v) Thereafter the plaintiff submitted her objection regarding submission of indemnity bond as well as surety bond on the ground that they were not executed on sufficient, stamp papers as stamp duty @ Rs. 5 per thousand was required to be paid on the valuation of the indemnity bond submitted by the defendants. (vi) After hearing both the parties, the learned civil Judge through one of the impugned orders dated 9-12-2003 asked the defendants to submit stamp duty of Rs. 1750/- on the indemnity bond up to 18-12-2003 failing which indemnity bond submitted by the defendants would not be verified and the defendants would lose their right to defend the suit as ordered by the Civil Judge through order dated 15-11-2003. (vii) Thereafter the learned Civil Judge through order dated 18-12-2003 closed the right of the defendants (applicants) to defend the suit as they did not submit the stamp duty in compliance of the order dated 9-12-2003.

(3.) In this revision petition, the orders dated 9-12-2003 and 18-12-2003 have been challenged on various grounds and the main submission of the learned Counsel for the defendants is that in the conditional order dated 15-11-2003 by which right to defend the suit was allowed to the defendants (applicants) on furnishing indemnity bond as well as surety bond for a sum of Rupees 35.000/- within seven days, there was no such condition as imposed by the learned Civil Judge through order dated 9-12-2003 and, therefore, imposition of such a condition is illegal and without jurisdiction and hence this revision petition should be allowed and the impugned orders dated 9-12-2003 and 18-12-2003 are liable to be quashed and set aside.