- (1.) The order of the learned Single Judge has stopped operation of the bank account. Let the same be lifted for the limited purpose to pay the cost so directed by us on the last occasion. The parties had commercial transactions. The appellant placed order upon the respondents for purchase of goods and paid a sum of Rs. 1 crore as and by way of advance. The respondents could not supply the goods in time resulting in claim for refund made by the appellant. The respondents issued five cheques of Rs. 20 lacs each. One cheque for Rs. 20 lacs was duly encashed. The parties were, however, silent as to why the other four cheques were not encashed contemporaneously. The appellant belatedly placed all the four cheques in bank for encashment that were dishonoured for non-payment. The appellant issued a statutory notice of demand upon the respondents and filed a suit. The respondents took a stand, they supplied the goods worth Rs. 81.03 lacs. Hence, they would be entitled to Rs. 1.03 lacs after adjusting the said sum of Rs. 80 lacs. The appellant would deny such supply. According to the appellant, the invoices did not bear the seal of the appellant. The respondents would claim, seal was there on the challans, the authenticity whereof was very much in dispute.
(2.) In this backdrop, an application for summary judgment was filed by the appellant. The learned Single Judge expressed doubt as to the claim and the defence. According to His Lordship, it would be somewhat peculiar, rather surprising, the respondents would not raise any grievance when one of the cheques was placed for encashment. They would also not make any contemporaneous claim for the balance amount of Rs. 1.03 lacs. His Lordship was also in doubt as to whether there could be a summary decree as according to His Lordship in case suit would go to trial, the respondents would get opportunity to prove the seal of the appellant appearing on the challans. Striking the balance, His Lordship directed the respondents to secure the claim to the extent of Rs. 80 lacs. The parties are aggrieved.
(3.) The appellant would claim, the learned Judge should have passed a decree whereas the respondents filed a cross-objection and pray for setting aside of the entire judgment and order impugned and consequential dismissal of the application for summary judgment.;