JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

I.As.8652/2018 (u/O XXXIX Rule 4 CPC) & 13231/2018 (for leave to defend)

1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit under Order XXXVII CPC praying for decree for a sum of USD 14,025,783 along with past due profit and late payment charges @ 2% for each days' delay. One M/s Met Trade (UAE) FZC (hereinafter `Met Trade') had availed of a Murabaha Facility Agreement (hereinafter, `Murabaha Facility') with the Plaintiff on 2nd May, 2016. As per the said agreement, the Plaintiff had given a facility of USD 10 million to M/s Met Trade. The agreement was signed by Mr. Raman Gupta, one of the directors of Met Trade. He was duly authorised by way of a board resolution dated 14th April, 2016 by Met Trade to enter into the said agreement with the Plaintiff. The Defendant - Mr. Raman Gupta had also executed a personal guarantee in favour of the Plaintiff in respect of this facility. Met Trade had also entered into an account pledge agreement dated 2nd May, 2016, as a condition for availing of the Murabaha Facility.

2. Various other agreements were also entered into along with the said facility agreement. The Murabaha facility agreement was amended on 27th October, 2016 by which the facility was increased to 20 million USD. The facility's maturity date was extended for a period of 365 days, vide amendment dated 2nd April, 2017. The remaining terms of the facility remained unchanged.

3. Various amounts which were to be repaid under the Facility agreement, availed by Met Trade, however, remained unpaid. This was notified by the Plaintiff on 17th July, 2017. Met Trade responded by stating that the payment would be delayed till the end of July, 2017 as there was a delay in receiving payments of certain supplies from customers. Thereafter, a meeting was held on 29th July, 2017 between the Plaintiff and Met Trade for discussion of overdue payments, however, no payments were made. The telephonic conversation with the Defendant also did not yield any favourable result in respect of the delayed payment. Accordingly, the Defendant agreed for submitting a refinancing proposal by 25th September, 2017. However, no such proposal was shared. The Plaintiff then issued a demand letter in terms of clause 16 of the Murabaha Facility to Met Trade on 19th October, 2017 for a total sum of USD 14,170,227.72. Thereafter, a meeting took place between the parties in Delhi on 24th October, 2014. Again, request was made for sharing of the refinancing proposal, but the same was not shared. The amounts remained outstanding. Finally, since the Defendant did not take any steps to clear the payments, on 20th March, 2018 a notice was issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant invoking the personal guarantee of the Defendant. The Plaintiff has, thereafter, filed the present suit invoking the guarantee under the Murabaha facility agreement.

4. Since the suit was instituted under Order XXXVII CPC on 21st May, 2018, the summons were issued in the prescribed form and an order was also passed to the following effect.

"Issue summons in the prescribed form of the suit and notice of injunction application to the defendants by all modes on filing of PF/RC returnable before the Joint Registrar on 28.08.2018 for completion of pleadings.

On service of summons the defendant to file an affidavit disclosing all his immovable properties and moveable properties and assets, including all bank accounts, Demat accounts, Funds, Shares, Bonds and all other assets of every description within four weeks."

5. As per the above order, the Defendant was to file an affidavit disclosing all his assets. The Defendant moved an application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC on the ground that only the laws of UAE are applicable and this Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. The Defendant also filed an application seeking leave to defend in the suit. Submissions were partly heard on the leave to defend application. One of the objections taken by the Defendant was