LI Network
Published on: January 14, 2024 at 10:30 IST
In a recent pronouncement, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court emphasized that the expedited resolution of summary suits should not compromise a defendant’s fair opportunity to present a defense.
Justice M A Chowdhary, referring to the principles governing the grant of leave to defend a summary suit, ruled that while the objective is to accelerate commercial dispute resolutions, it should not come at the expense of denying the defendant a reasonable chance to defend themselves.
Quoting from the case ‘Sudin Dilip Talaulikar v. Polycap Wires Private Limited & Ors.’ (2019), Justice Chowdhary highlighted that when the defense discloses prima facie fair and reasonable facts, unconditional leave must be granted. The judge underscored the importance of the court’s subjective satisfaction based on the material presented and explained that conditional leave may be granted when there are plausible and probable aspects in the defense, even if some doubt persists.
The case in question involved a dispute between Mohammad Altaf Mir (appellant) and Firdous Ahmad Mir (respondent) concerning a Trial Court’s judgment and decree favoring the respondent. The Trial Court directed the appellant to pay a substantial amount along with interest.
Represented by Advocate Rizwan-u-Zaman Bhat, the appellant contested the decision, arguing that crucial aspects were overlooked, including the dispute regarding the execution of the Hundi. The appellant emphasized that the outstanding amount did not exceed Rs. 30,000.
On the other side, Mr. Syed Sajad Geelani, Advocate for the respondent, contended that the appellant’s defense lacked merit, as he had borrowed a substantial amount and failed to repay, leading to the issuance of the Hundi.
After considering both sides, Justice Chowdhary ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that if the defense discloses a triable issue that is plausible, leave should be granted. The court held that the Trial Court had erred in categorizing the defense as ‘moonshine’ without adequately considering the triable issues raised by the appellant.
As a result, the Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment and decree, and remanded the case back to the Trial Court for a fresh trial. The Trial Court was directed to grant conditional leave to the appellant.
Case Title: Mohammad Altaf Mir V/S Firdous Ahmad Mir
