A technical allowing order dismissing a civil revisions petition. The High Court agreed with the trial court's grant of leave to defend a suit for recovery based on allegations of forgery, finding no grounds to impose collateral security during pendency.
Petition to quash the trial court's order granting leave to defend was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CR-4846-2022 (O&M)
108
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CM-14545-CII-2022 in/and CR-4846-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.01.2023
Subhash …..Petitioner
Versus Ashik ..…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
Present: Mr. Kamal Narula, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner. *****
ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)
CM-14545-CII-2022
For the reasons stated, the application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Exemption is allowed as prayed for.
CR-4846-2022
Petition herein, inter alia, is for setting aside an order dated 13.09.2022, whereby the trial Court has granted leave to defend to the respondent/defendant.
Page 1 of 2
ASHISH 2023.01.12 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CR-4846-2022 (O&M)
upon the respondent to furnish collateral security to secure repayment of loan if the suit is decreed.
“Plaintiff has filed the present suit on the basis of pronote and receipt pronote dated 01.04.2020. Defendant has denied the execution of the pronote and has taken a specific plea that he never obtained any loan nor the document bears his signature. That the said documents are forged documents. In these circumstances, defendant has a valid defence to contest the suit. Therefore, application is allowed.”
Once a triable issue has been made out, the defendant (respondent herein) is entitled to be granted leave to defend, more particularly in view of the allegation of forgery, which undoubtedly is a triable issue. Nothing has been placed on record to establish that in case the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant would be unable to satisfy the decree in the absence of there being an order directing him to furnish a collateral and/or security during pendency of the trial.
the trial Court as there is no irregularity either in facts or in law.
January 04, 2023 ashish Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Page 2 of 2
ASHISH 2023.01.12 16:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to defend should be granted on allegations of forgery of a loan pronote.
Whether conditional leave to defend requiring collateral security is warranted in forgery cases.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Subhash
Ashik
Arun Monga
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
