1 mp t IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDEMENT NO. 426 OF 2007 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 2035 OF 2007 Crompton Greaves Limited .. Plaintiff versus M/s.Alfa Engineering Company .. Defendant ... Mr.Ashish Kamat i/b M/s.V. Deshpande & Co. for the plaintiff. Mr.Swapnil Bangur i/b M/s.Vinod Mistry & Co. for the defendant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 29th April 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Summons for Judgement is taken out by the plaintiff in a suit filed for recovery of the balance of the price of the goods sold and delivered 2 to the defendant. 3. The defendant has resisted the suit and filed affidavit in reply to the Summons for Judgement. 4. In my view, defence raised by the defendant in the written statement cannot be said to be a moonshine defence. It is a plausible defence though it cannot be stated without trial whether defendant would succeed in the defence. 5. Admittedly, there was a delay in the supply of the goods. Minutes of the meeting at Exhibit-B to the plaint do show that plaintiff itself has admitted the delay has regretted the same and has assured the plaintiff to improve upon. 6. According to the defendant, the motors were to be used for supply to the port trust and defendant is sufferring a claim from the port trust on account of delay. The defendant therefore claims set offs/ counter claim which he would raise by filing of a written statement. 7. In my view, the defendant is not a moon shine defence. The defendant is entitled to an 3 unconditional leave to defend the suit. 8. The defendant is accordingly granted unconditional leave to defend the suit. Suit shall stand transferred to the list of commercial causes. Defendant shall file written statement within 10 weeks. (D.G. KARNIK, J)