In absence of any substantial defence made out by defendant to defend suit, mere illusory averments would not be sufficient to grant leave to defend suit

The case of the plaintiff is that defendant took a loan from him to the tune of Rs.1,20,000/- and further advanced a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for developing defendant's business and executed two promissory notes for Rs.1,20,000/- and for Rs. 50,000/- assuring to repay said amounts with interest 24% interest per annum respectively as and when plaintiff demanded repayment of the said sum. Despite that, the defendant failed to repay the loan amount. Thereby plaintiff filed suit for recovery of Rs.2,86,600/- along with contracted interest of 24% per annum on the principal amount of Rs.1,70,000/-.

The case is of the summary suit. In the summary suit, leave has to be obtained by the defendant to defend the suit. However, it is to be seen as to the ground on which such leave has been sought by the defendant.

As far as leave to defend suit is concerned, a clear unambiguous and substantial defence has to be put forth by the defendant seeking leave to defend.

In the affidavit filed by the defendant in support of an application for leave to defend, the defendant has pleaded that earlier he had received the amount from the plaintiff, however, the quantum stated by the plaintiff is disputed. Execution of promissory note is not disputed. Defendant has not even issued any notice to reclaim the promissory note from the plaintiff if at all he has paid the amount mentioned in the promissory note.

Defendant has not pleaded any substantial defence permitting him to defend the suit.

In absence of any substantial defence made out by the defendant, mere illusory averments would not be sufficient to grant leave to defend the suit.

Dismissal of the application filed by the defendant seeking leave to defend suit cannot be faulted.

Appearing Counsel/s : Mr. J. James, Mr. B. Dineshkumar