Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, J.: - Petitioner has assailed order dated 20.04.2015 (Annexure P-4) passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Panchkula vide which application of the petitioner for leave to defend the suit was dismissed.

2. Plaintiff/respondent filed a suit under Order 37 CPC for recovery of an amount of Rs.2 lacs along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of dishonour of cheque. On receipt of summons, defendant/petitioner appeared on 15.09.2014 and moved an application along with affidavit dated 15.09.2014 for leave to defend the suit. The summons were received by the defendant/petitioner on 15.09.2014 and he filed an application promptly on the same day.

3. Trial Court dismissed the application vide order dated 20.04.2015 on the premise that the service of summons under Order 37 Rule 2 CPC was effected upon the defendant/petitioner on 04.09.2014. Period of ten days from 05.09.2014 expired on 15.09.2014. Defendant entered appearance on 15.09.2014 at 6.00 p.m. as per endorsement made on the application for leave to defend itself. The trial Court observed that receipt of application at 6.00 p.m. in the evening was beyond the court hours and, therefore, the application was dismissed on two counts. Firstly that the defendant/petitioner appeared after the expiry of ten days from the date of service and he moved the application on 15.09.2014 at 6.00 p.m. in the evening beyond the court hours. Such appearance of the defendant was not in consonance with the provision of Order 37 CPC.

4. Secondly, no application for condonation of delay was moved to show sufficient cause by the defendant in not appearing within the time prescribed. The trial Court observed that the provisions in terms of Order 37 CPC have not been complied with and the defendant/petitioner did not enter appearance within stipulated period, nor any application for condonation of delay was filed. In this background, the prayer for granting leave to defend the suit was declined by the trial Court on 20.04.2015.

5. Order 37 Rule 2 CPC deals with institution of summary suits. For ready reference, the same is reproduced hereasunder”-

“2. Institution of summary Suits.-

(1) A suit, to which this Order applies, may, if the plaintiff desires to proceed hereunder, be instituted by presenting a plaint which shall contain,—

(a) a specific averment to the effect that the suit is filed under this Order;

(b) that no relief, which does not fall within the ambit of this rule, has been claimed in the plaint; and

(c) the following inscription, immediately below the number of the suit in the title of the suit, namely:— (Under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908)”.

(2) The summons of the suit shall be in form No. 4 in Appendix B or in such other Form as may , from time to time, be prescribed.

(3) The defendant shall not defend the suit referred to in sub-rule (1) unless he enters an appearance and in default of his entering an appearance the allegations in the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree for any sum, not exceeding the sum mentioned in the summons, together with interest at the rate specified, if any, up to the date of the decree and such sum for costs as may be determined by the High Court from time to time by rules made in that behalf and such decree may be executed forthwith.”

6. The summons of the suit have to be issued to the defendant in form No.4 as shown in Appendix B. The defendant cannot defend the suit as referred in sub-Rule (1) of Rule 2 of Order 37 CPC, unless he enters an appearance. In the event of default in his appearance, the allegation of the plaint shall be deemed to be admitted and the plaintiff shall be entitled to a decree for the amount in question.

7. Rule 3 of Order 37 CPC prescribes for the procedure for the appearance of defendant. In the event of service of summons upon the defendant under Rule 2 of Order 37 CPC in the prescribed form, the defendant may at any time within ten days of su