ANAMAY INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PARUL GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in the present civil suit, filed by respondent No.1 under Order 37 CPC for recovery of amount of cheque of Rs.4,00,000.00 (Rs. Four Lacs) along with interest. In this Civil Suit, which is a summary suit, petitionersdefendants put in appearance on 6/12/2019 but did not submit any application for leave to defence, hence, their right to submit an application for leave to defence has been forfeited vide order dtd. 28/1/2020 and this order has been challenged by petitioners/defendants Nos. 1 and 2 by means of filing instant Civil Misc. Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) Having heard counsel for petitioners and counsel appearing for respondent No.1-plaintiff so also from perusal of record, it is apparent that from the side of respondent No.1-plaintiff, for appearance of defendants, a summon for appearance under Order 37 Rule 2 CPC was got published in newspaper 'Rastradoot' in Jaipur Metro, for their appearance. A copy of newspaper, wherein summon for appearance was published, is available on record as Annexure-2. A perusal of Annexure-2 clearly shows that this was a summon for appearance of defendants which specifically stipulates that after appearance of defendants, a summon for judgment shall be served upon them

(3.) As per Order 37 Rule 3(4) CPC, summon for judgment is required to be served upon defendant separately, in terms of Form No.4-A prescribed in Appendix B or in any such other form.