Law:

Section:

Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XXXVII, Rr. 2 & 3---Institution of summary suit on the basis of negotiable instrument---Leave to defend, grant of---Scope---Leave to defend was granted subject to furnishing bank guarantee to the tune of amount in question---Defendant not only failed to comply with the direction of Trial Court but also did not submit written statement and his defence was struck off and suit was decreed---Validity---Trial Court was empowered to grant leave to defend unconditionally or subject to such terms as to payment into court giving security, framing and recording issues or otherwise as the court had deemed fit---Earlier, defendant failed to appear and ex-parte decree was passed in favour of plaintiff---Trial Court was justified to attach condition of furnishing bank guarantee to the tune of amount in question while granting leave to defend---Defendant had never denied execution of pronote or handing over of cheques dishonoured to the plaintiff---Defendant had failed to furnish the requisite bank guarantee and submit written statement in accordance with the direction of court---Ex-parte proceedings were properly initiated against the defendant resulting into decree in favour of plaintiff---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. 2004 SCMR 882 rel. JUDGMENT QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J.---Roman Ali Khan Tanoli, appellant, has assailed order dated 2-9-2013 of the learned Additional District Judge-IV, Mansehra, whereby his defence was struck off in suit of the respondent, and a decree for recovery of Rs.3140,000 was granted in favour of respondent/plaintiff Malik Khurram Shahzad. 2. The respondent/plaintiff had lodged suit against the appellant/defendant for recovery of Rs.3140,000 along with 10 % interest under Order XXXVII, C.P.C. The claimed amount was, allegedly, outstanding against the appellant/defendant and the latter had executed a pro note and undertaking on 10-8-2009 besides handing over cheques for discharging his liability up to 1-9-2009; but neither the amount was paid nor the cheques were honoured, hence the suit. 3. The appellant/defendant failed to appear in the Court in response to the summons issued by the Court and was,…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492