T. P. S. CHAWLA, J.

( 1 ) A very fundamental point regarding the procedure to be followed on the original side has been raised in this case. The plaintiff has instituted a suit under Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Code on the basis of a cheque given by the defendant. After summons had been served, and no application for leave to defend the suit was moved though the period prescribed had expired, counsel for the plaintiff prayed that a decree be passed forthwith. On the other hand, counsel for the defendant maintained that the stage for filing an application for leave to defend had not yet arrived, and time had not even begun to run because a summons for judgment: had not so far been served on the defendant.

( 2 ) TO understood the respective contentions a little background is necessary. The Civil Procedure Code was enacted in 1908. In Order 37 it provided a summary Procedure applicable to suits based on Negotiable Instruments . The defendant could not appear or defend the suit unless he obtained leave from the court. Under the Limitation Act of 1908 an application for leave had to be made within 10 days from service of summons : Article 159. The position under the Limitatio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document