A defendant demonstrating a reasonable defense requiring evidence is entitled to unconditional leave to defend without the need for furnishing security.

ORDER :

1. This order shall also govern the disposal of M.P.No.5665 of 2023, M.P 5629 of 2023 and M.P.5737 of 2023, as in all these cases, identical issues are involved. For the sake of convenience, the facts as narrated in M.P.No.5629 of 2023, have been taken into consideration.

2. These miscellaneous petitions have been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 04.09.2023 passed in Summary Suit no.193B/2022 by Third, Civil Judge, Class-I, Indore; whereby, the application filed by petitioners/defendants under Order 37 Rule 3(5) read with section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (herein after referred to as “CPC’) has been partly allowed and while allowing the leave to defend to petitioners/defendants, it has also ordered to deposit the entire claim of the respondent/plaintiff by way of furnishing solvent surety.

3. Counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to the finding recorded by the learned judge of the civil Court wherein it is held that the defendants have raised certain grounds which can only be decided after the evidence is led by the parties and thus, it is submitted that the petitioners have already made a ground for their entitlement to leave to defend, hence the conditions to furnish the guarantee deserves to be set aside.

4. In support of his submissions, counsel for the petitioners has relied upon an order passed by this Court in the case of Kamal Maithil vs. Ajay Sharma reported as 2023(3) MPLJ 383 wherein this Court has also relied upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case IDBI Trusteeship services Limited Vs. Hubtown Limited reported as 2016 MPLJ Online (SC) 132=(2017) 1 SCC 568, and has held that where the defendant is able to demonstrate that he/she has a reasonable defence which requires leading of the evidence, in that case the condition of furnishing any security does not arise.

5. Counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs on the other hand has opposed the prayer, and it is submitted that no case for interference is made out as the learned judge of the Civil Court has rightly imposed the condition as it is the discretion of the Court while allowing the leave to defend to petitioners/defendants and to file the written statement.

6. Heard. On due consideration, and on perusal of the documents filed on record, this Court finds that so far as findings of the civil Court is concerned, the same reads as under :-

^^blh izdkj tgka ,d vksj ifjlhek vf/kfu;e ds fcUnq ij lk{; izLrqr gksuk vko’;d gS ogha nwljh vksj oknh }kjk U;k;ky; ds le{k LoPN gkFkksa ls mifLFkr u gksdj xyr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij izdj.k izLrqr fd, tkus ds fcUnq ij Hkh izdj.k ds bl izdze ij dksbZ fu"d"kZ ugha fn;k tk ldrk gSA mijksDr fcUnqvksa dk izHkkoh fujkdj.k mHk;i{k dh lk{; ds mijkar gh laHko gS ,oa mDr mn~ns’; ckor ;g vko’;d gS fd izfroknh dks lk{; izLrqrh dk volj fn;k tkosA pwafd mDr jkf’k oknh ds }kjk C;kt ij fn;k tkuk crk;k tk jgk gS ,slh fLFkfr esa lkgwdkjh vf/kfu;e ds v/khu yk;lsal gksus laca/kh fof/kd fcUnq ij Hkh fopkj fd;k tkuk gSA

mijksDr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa izfroknh dks izfrj{kk dk volj fn;k tkuk mfpr izrhr gksrk gS] fdUrq pwafd izfroknh dks izfrj{kk dk volj fn;s tkus dh vuqefr fcuk fdlh 'krZ ds fn;s tkuk mfpr izrhr ugha gksrk gSA

U;k;n`"Vkar ch-,y- d’;i fo:) ts-,e-,l- LVhYl ,aM ikoj dkikZsjs’ku 2022 ,lh-lh-lh- vkWuykbZu ,l-lh- 59 esa ekuuh; lokZsPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g O;Dr fd;k x;k gS fd izfrj{kk laca/kh fuosnu vioknh fLFkfr esa gh [kkfjt fd;k tkuk pkfg, rFkk mfpr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa izfrj{kk dk volj iznku fd;k tkuk pkfg,A

vr% mHk;i{k dh vksj ls izLrqr rdZ ,oa fof/kd fl)karks rFkk gLrxr izdj.k ds fof’k"V rF; ,oa ifjafLFkfr ds vkyksd esa izfroknh ls olwyh ;ksX; jkf’k 6]75]000@& :i;s ds laca/k esa l{ke tekur izLrqr fd;s tkus dh 'krZ ij izfroknh dh vksj ls izLrqr vkosnu i= Lohdkj fd;k tkdj izfrj{kk dh vuqefr iznku dh tkrh gSA

izdj.k mijksDrkuqlkj tekur izLrqr fd;s tkus@tokcnkok izLrqfr gsrq fnukad 07@11@2003 dks is’k gksA^^

7. On perusal of the aforesaid finding, it clearly reveals that