JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner, a reputed firm of lawyers, was sued by the respondent, a lawyer who was working with the petitioner on retainership basis. The respondent preferred a suit as a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). Leave to defend the suit has been granted by the learned Additional District Judge ('the learned ADJ') under Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of the CPC, vide order dated 9th June 2022, conditional on the petitioner depositing, with the court, ? 58,93,935/-, being the amount claimed by the respondent from the petitioners in the suit. The learned ADJ has also directed release of the said deposited amount to the respondent, on the respondent furnishing of an equivalent bank guarantee.

2. Aggrieved by the direction, of the learned ADJ, to the petitioners, to deposit ? 58,93,935/- as a condition for leave to defend the suit instituted by the respondent, the petitioners have approached this Court, invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India for the said purpose.

3. I have heard Mr. Atul Chitale, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent, at length.

4. Learned Senior