A. K. CHAWLA, J.

1. The appellant (hereafter “Century”), in this regular first appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 01.12.2017 of the learned Single Judge, in the leave to defend applications by the Respondents/defendants (“Sachin” and “TCC” respectively hereafter) in the summary suit instituted under Order XXXVII CPC. The impugned judgment dismissed the summary suit against all three defendants including the third defendant (hereafter 'Tarun'), with the liberty to the plaintiff to approach the court of appropriate jurisdiction.

2. Briefly, the relevant facts are that Century had instituted a suit for recovery of money against the defendants under Order XXXVII CPC. The suit proceeded on the premise that Century having its registered office at New Delhi and factory at Tatarpur, Distt. Faridabad (now Distt. Palwal) was inter alia engaged in the business of manufacture and trading of aluminum alloy ingots and allied products and that, it used to import aluminum scrap, which was the principal raw material for manufacture of aluminum alloy, from USA. For the purpose, it used to place orders and make advance payments to Metal Worldwide Inc. in short 'MWI', registered and incorporated under the US laws and of which, the first respondent and his wife Ms. Seloni Chhabra were the majority shareholders and directors. In the plaint, Century also averred that the purchase orders were placed from New Delhi and so were the advance payments made by Century to MWI through its bankers at New Delhi through electronic transfers; payments were made by Century on the representations and promises made by the first respondent that the goods would be shipped immediately on the receipt of advance payments. Such business transactions are said to have started amongst the parties in December, 2009 and continued upto January, 2011. During the course of such transactions, Century made a total payment of US$ 29,01,379/- to MWI and as against which it received goods valued at US$ 22,75,379/-, leaving a balance sum of US$ 6,26,000/-, against which MWI failed to supply the goods inspite of repeated requests and reminders. For the recovery of advance payments for such undelivered goods, Century filed a suit (Century Metal Recycling Pvt. Ltd. vs. Metal Worldwide Inc. et al.) and a partial summary judgment was passed by the District Judge, Florida, USA on 05.02.2016 in its favour and against MWI (to the extent of US$ 7,00,000/- together with interest thereon @15% p.a. from 1st April, 2011 to February, 2016 besides Attorney's fees and costs in the sum of US$ 6373 and US$ 26.36 respectively). The decree had to be satisfied by MWI and Worldwide Metal LLC in short 'WMLLC' jointly and severally.

3. WMLLC, is a limited liability company incorporated after the dissolution of MWI and was a party to the suit in which the summary judgment dated 05.02.2016 came to be passed by the District Judge, Florida. For the remainder of the case or the issues, the matter was kept pending for decision. During this course, on a joint motion filed by the parties and the agreement arrived at, a consent judgment came to be passed against the second respondent i.e TCC Wireless Inc. on the assertion of successors’ liability in the sum of US$ 3,50,000/- which was also to bear interest in accordance with 28 USC, 1961. Parties also agreed that the Attorney's fees and costs would be payable to Century in the manner provided. In addition, the first respondent furnished personal guarantee dated 20.07.2016 to secure the payment in favour of Century in terms of the joint motion dated 20.07.2016 and the order entering consent judgment dated 05.08.2016 in short 'the foreign judgment' passed by the Magistrate Judge, Distt. of Maryland, Florida.

4. Century alleged that on the agreement arrived at and under the said foreign judgment, an action by way of suit was maintainable and enforceable in India and that, the foreign judgment was conclusive. Sachin in his application sought leave to de