JUDGMENT - DESHMUKH D.K., J.:---By this appeal, the original defendants in Summary Suit No. 5307 of 1999 challenge the order dated 4th June, 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Summons for Judgment No. 294 of 2000. The respondents/plaintiffs filed Summary Suit No. 5307 of 1999. The case of the plaintiffs was that the plaintiffs have given to the defendants as intercorporate loan a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- for a period of two months. According to the plaintiffs, the agreed rate of interest was 27% p.a. Certain shares were also pledged by the defendants with the plaintiffs. The defendants also executed a demand promissory note dated 1st November, 1995. The amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- was paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants by a cheque dated 3rd November, 1995. According to the plaintiffs, in the month of January 1996, the defendants issued two cheques in favour of the plaintiffs for repayment of the loan dated 16th January, 1996 and 25th January, 1996, but both the cheques were dishonoured. Thereafter, according to the plaintiffs, the defendants requested for renewal of the loan as they were not in a position to repay the amount. The loan was renewed and therefore, the defendants executed a fresh demand promissory note dated 15th March, 1996 for Rs. 25,00,000/-. The defendants also issued a post dated cheque dated 4th June, 1996 in the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/-. According to the plaintiffs, this cheque when presented to the bank was again dishonoured. Ultimately, as the amount was not being repaid, the plaintiffs filed suit for recovery of the amount. The plaintiffs stated in the plaint that in August 1998 and November 1990, an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs. In the particulars of the claim, the plaintiffs claim a decree in the amount of Rs. 33,44,825/- which according to the plaintiffs, has been shown as due and payable by the defendants to the plaintiffs upto 31st August, 1997 as per the confirmation letter dated 3rd September 1997 and the plaintiffs also claim a decree in the amount of Rs. 8,35,000/- being interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- from 1st September, 1997 to 30th August, 1999. In the summons for judgment, the defendants applied for leave to defend by filing an affidavit. The summons for judgment was decided by order dated 4th June, 2002. From the order of the learned Single Judge, it appears that the principal defence that was raised was that as per the promissory note, interest could have been charged at the rate of 18 % p.a. whereas according to the claim of the plaintiffs, interest was charged at the rate of 27% p.a. According to the defendants, therefore, for charging interest at the rate of 27% p.a. there is no written agreement between the parties and therefore, the summary suit was not maintainable. Perusal of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, however, shows that according to the learned Single Judge, though statement has been made in the plaint that interest was chargeable at the rate of 27% p.a., actually the plaintiffs have charged interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The learned Single Judge, however, granted leave to defend to the defendants on depositing an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- within a period of twelve weeks from the date of the order.

2. In this appeal, it is this order dated 4th June, 2002 granting conditional leave to defend to the defendants which is challenged. Before us, the learned Counsel appearing for defendants argued only one contention. He submits that as per the particulars of the claim given at Exhibit 'L' to the plaint, an amount of Rs. 33,44,825/- was claimed as per confirmation dated 3rd September, 1997. According to the confirmation dated 3rd September 1997 at Exhibit 'H' to the plaint, an amount of Rs. 32,45,590/- is shown as the amount of loan including interest upto 30th June, 1997 and an amount of Rs. 99,235/- is shown as interest upto 31st August, 1989 at the rate of 18% p.a.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document