1 sj115-09.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Summons for Judgment No.115 of 2009 in Summary Suit No. 2927 of 2008 Amtek Laboratories Ltd. .. Plaintiffs v/s. M/s. Hirnandani Steel & Tubes P. Ltd. & Ors. ..Defendants Ms.Seema Chopda & T.R.Yadav for the Plaintiffs. Ms.Chavan i/b.Ashwin Ankhad & Associates for the Defendant Nos.1 and 2 Ms.Sanidha Vedpathak i/b. Maneksha & Sethna for the Defendant No.3 CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 19th October , 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsels on both sides. Defendant No.3 is formal defendant. Summons for Judgment is not taken out against defendant no.3. According to plaintiffs, defendant no.1 conveyed certain property described in Agreement dated 21.1.2004 in favour of the plaintiffs. Thereafter plaintiffs started enjoying the suit property and subsequently the Corporation called the society to pay off the arrears of Municipal Taxes at specified rate and in the whole process 2 sj115-09.sxw plaintiffs were required to pay arrears of property taxes for the period particularly 2000 to 20.01.2004, This period is prior to the execution of the conveyance in favour of the plaintiffs. According to plaintiffs they are entitled to recover from the defendants taxes which they have paid for the period April 2000 to 21.01.2004. In support of this, clause 4(d) and (i) were pressed in service and that is how Summary Suit is filed. After having heard counsels on both sides, I am inclined to observe that despite the language set out in the aforesaid two clauses, the amount claimed by the plaintiffs does not turn out to be the liquidated sum and that is how the institution of the present suit as summary suit is not maintainable and that is why the defendant nos.1 and 2 are entitled to unconditional leave. Even otherwise, so far as the defendant no.2 is concerned, she is shown as Director of Defendant no.1 and the property was conveyed in favour of the plaintiffs by defendant no.1. To that extent also defendant no.2 would be entitled to unconditional leave. Hence following order is passed to dispose of the Summons for Judgment. ORDER i. Unconditional leave is granted to defendant nos.1 and 2. 3 sj115-09.sxw ii. Defendant nos.1 and 2 to file written statement directly in the office on or before 10.12.2010 . Defendants to serve copy of the same upon the advocate for the plaintiffs within 10 days from filing of the written statement in the office. There shall be no order as to costs. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]