IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (JABALPUR BENCH)
VISHAL DHAGAT, J.
Man Singh - Appellant
Versus
Ranveer Singh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Petition No. 2461 of 2020
Decided On : 10-03-2021
Summary Suit - Order 37 of CPC - Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 - Order 37 Rule 2, Order 37 Rule 3, Order 37 Rule 3(4) of CPC
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a suit in the format of a summary suit under Order 37 of CPC, but the trial court held that the case would be tried as a regular suit due to the dismissal of a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. The petitioner challenged this order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the suit should be treated as a summary suit as it was filed for recovery on the basis of a cheque, and the petitioner had not waived off their rights by not objecting initially. The rights of the defendants were protected, and the matter was sent back to the trial court to start from the same stage where the mistake was committed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the suit should be tried as a regular suit or a summary suit, and whether the petitioner had waived off their rights by not objecting initially.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the suit should be treated as a summary suit as it was filed for recovery on the basis of a cheque, and the petitioner had not waived off their rights by not objecting initially.
Final Decision: The miscellaneous petition filed by the petitioner was allowed, the order passed by the trial court was set aside, and the trial court was directed to treat the suit as a summary suit.
ORDER :
Vishal Dhagat, J.
1. Petitioner has filed the present miscellaneous petition challenging order dated 13.08.2019 contained in Annexure-P/7. By said order, learned trial Court has held that case will be tried as regular suit and not as summary suit as complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 was dismissed, thereafter appeal was also dismissed. Therefore, case for recovery of money involved complicated questions. Suit has been registered as Class-B suit and procedure adopted is like in regular suit. Plaintiff has not raised any objection at time of appearance of defendant that civil suit is filed as a summary suit and, therefore, it was ordered that civil suit shall be heard as regular suit.
2. Petitioner/plaintiff submitted that he had filed the suit in format of summary suit under Order 37 of CPC. Trial Court ought to have issued notice to defendant in Form-4 of Appendix-B of CPC.
3. It is submitted by counsel appearing for petitioner that act of Court may not cause injury or harm to a party. He relied on the maxim of actus curiae neminem gravabit.
4. Counsel appearing for petitioner has relied on judgment reported in (2008) 8 SCC 505; Dr. Purushotama Reddy and another Vs. K. Sateesh, in para-9 it is held as under:-
5. Counsel appearing for respondent/defendant submitted that defendant will be prejudicially affected if suit is tried as a summary suit. As per the procedure of summary suit, defendant has to file an application for permission to defend the case. No such application has been filed. Notice was issued to respondent in Form 1 of CPC. Petitioner has not raised any objection initially and now he cannot raise any objection that suit ought to have been tried as a summary suit. Respondent will suffer adversely as limitation prescribed for filing an application for permission to defend the suit is already over. Trial Court has rightly passed the order that suit is to be tried as a regular suit and not as a summary suit because civil suit involved complicated questions. In view of same, he made submission that this miscellaneous petition be dismissed.
6. Counsel appearing for respondent submitted that miscellaneous petition has been filed after delay and same has not been explained. There is no error of jurisdiction in the order passed by the trial Court and procedure prescribed under Order 37, Rule 3 (4) of CPC is not complied with, therefore, trial Court has rightly passed the order.
7. Counsel for respondent relied on judgment Atma Tube Products Ltd. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.). In the said judgment, it was held that in a suit which is filed as summary suit under Order 37 Rules 2 and 3, it is mandatory to issue summons in format Form No. 4 (Appendix-B). Since defendants were not served as per provision of Order 37 of CPC, suit was to be treated as a regular suit. Issuing of summons in Form-4 (Appendix-B) is mandatory so far as suit filed under Order 37 of CPC are concerned and summons were issued to defendant in regular suit. High Court directed the trial Court to treat the present suit as a regular suit. Trial Court cannot deprive the defendant to contest the suit.
8. Heard the counsel for petitioner as well as respondent.
9. Order 37 applies to the suit filed upon bill of exchange, hundi and promissory note. Suit was filed by petitioner to recover liquidated demand on basis of bill of exchange. Therefore, in a suit filed by petitioner Order 37 of CPC is attracted. Petitioner has instituted the suit making specific averments that suit is filed under Order 37 of CPC. Order 37, Rule 2 of CPC was complied with by the plaintiff. After filing of suit, it is for the Court to issue the summons and as per Order 37 Rule
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the nature of the suit, the rights of the parties, and the procedure to be followed should be determined based on the specific provisions of t....
Point of law: O.7, R.11 as held by the Supreme Court in the case of P.V. Guru Raj Reddy (Supra) is a drastic measure and would be applicable only when there is no cause of action that arises. The con....
In a summary suit, if defendant discloses such facts of a prima facie fair and reasonable defence, court may grant unconditional leave to defend.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.