IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.08.2025 Dharmender ...Appellant Versus M/s Haryana Steel Mongers (P) Ltd. and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present:- Mr.Puneet Jindal, Senior Advocate with Mr. S.K. Yadav, Advocate, for the appellant.

*****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL)

1. In the present letters patent appeal, the challenge is to the order dated 16.07.2025 passed by the learned Sing Judge in CWP-8634-2019, by which, the prayer of the appellant raised against the order passed by the Commercial Court, dated 28.02.2017, that the security amount of Rs.1.25 crores with one surety in the like amount be furnished while granting leave to defend has been partly interfered with, on the ground that the same is perverse.

2. The learned Single Judge, after considering all the facts and the relevant provisions, came to the conclusion that the condition imposed of providing security and one surety to the principal amount of Rs.64,72,056/- while granting leave to defend does not suffer from any infirmity either on facts or on law, but reduced the amount of providing security from Rs.1.