Law: Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Section: 115, 151

Summary The Islamabad High Court dismissed the Civil Revision Petition and upheld the Trial Court’s order striking off the defendant’s right to defend a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC. The Court held that the defendant repeatedly failed to comply with the condition of furnishing security/surety despite being granted multiple opportunities. Since the defendant neither complied with the conditional leave order nor sought its modification or explained the default, the Trial Court rightly recalled the leave to defend. The High Court further held that revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 CPC cannot be invoked in the absence of jurisdictional error, illegality, or material irregularity. Tagline Failure to comply with conditions of leave to defend under Order XXXVII CPC results in forfeiture of the right to defend; revisional interference is unwarranted absent jurisdictional error. ORDER; MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, J. Through the instant Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”), Petitioner has assailed the Order dated 11.04.2025 ["Impugned Order"] passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, West-Islamabad ["Trial Court"] whereby the right of the Petitioner/Defendant to defend himself has been struck off and the leave earlier granted to him has been recalled due to non-submission of surety bond. The brief facts of the case as per the contents of the instant Revision Petition are that the Respondent/Plaintiff instituted a Suit for Recovery of Rs. 5,000,000/-under Order XXXVII, CPC, on the basis of Cheque No. 21023636 dated 05.04.2022, drawn for an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/-, against the Petitioner/Defendant. The said suit was initially decreed ex-parte vide Judgment and Decree dated 11.01.2023. Subsequently, on 04.05.2024, the Petitioner/Defendant filed an Application for setting aside the aforementioned ex-parte Judgment and Decree. The said Application was contested by the Respondent/Plaintiff through a written reply. Upon hearing both parties, the learned Trial Court, vide Order dated 24.09.2024, allowed the Application subject…