JUDGMENT - F.I. REBELLO, J.:---Plaintiffs in the present summary suit have applied for summons for judgment on the ground that there are no triable issues arising from the defences taken by the defendants and consequently suit be decreed in favour of the plaintiffs. In the present summary suit, the defendant No. 1 company have not applied for leave to defend. However, defendants Nos. 2 and 3 who are said to be guarantors have so applied. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 have pointed out that there is no written agreement by the defendant with the plaintiff and at any rate the receipt issued by defendant No. 1 is not an agreement based on which a summary suit could have been filed nor was the receipt properly stamped and consequently inadmissible in evidence. It is, therefore, contended that leave to defend should also be granted in favour of defendant No. 1. The Court, it is pointed out, must also prima facie, come to the conclusion that the suit is maintainable as a summary suit even though defendant No. 1 has not applied for leave to defend. On this background, few facts need to be stated.

2.It is the case of the plaintiffs-Bank that the Board of Directors of defendant No. 1 by resolution

Click Here to Read the rest of this document