CHITTUKURI GOPALA RAO Vs. PARACHURI SUBBA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application to revise an order of the District Munsif of Tenali whereby when granting leave to defend a suit under Order 37, Civil Procedure Code, he imposed upon the petitioner a condition that he should give security for the suit claim. In the face of Clause (2) of Order 37, Rule 3, it cannot be seriously disputed that in suits under Order 37, the Court has jurisdiction to impose conditions when granting leave to defend. But Mr. Satyanarayana Rao on behalf of the petitioner has strongly insisted that in view of several decisions of this Court, a Court ought not to impose a condition when granting leave to defend except under exceptional circumstances. In particular, he referred to a decision of Madavan Nair, J., in Olayatt Kunhu V/s. Ussan Kasim Sait and a decision of Ramesam, J., in Venkata Kishtnayya v. Ramaswami where the learned Judges have interfered even in revision with orders imposing a condition of security. He also drew my attention to a decision of Schwabe, C.J. and Ramesam, J., in Periya Miyana Marakayar V/s. Subramania Aiyar (1923) 46 M.L.J. 255 and a more recent decision of a Division Bench in Sundaram Chettiar V/s. Valli Amma (1934) I.L.R. 58 Mad. 116 : 68 M.L.J 16 where the decision in Periya Miyana Marakayar V/s. Subramania Aiyar (1901) 85 L.T. 262 is referred to with approval.

(2.) The judgment in Periya Miyana Marakayar V/s. Subramania Aiyar (1923) 46 M.L.J. 255 itself recognises that: In exceptional cases where for instance there appears to be so grave a suspicion that the Court comes to the conclusion that the defence is put in only in order to obtain further time

(3.) the Court may impose a condition for giving of security. In the single Judge decisions above referred to, the learned Judges mainly proceeded on the footing that the lower Court had not bestowed attention upon the question whether any special circumstances existed justifying the imposition of an order for security before granting leave. I am unable to agree that the lower Court has made any such mistake in the present case.