1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.134 OF 2006 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.3263 OF 2005 Chandur Moriani, Sole Proprietor of Chandmor Agencies. ...Plaintiff. vs. Mukesh Sharma, Sole proprietor of Tanya Enterprises. ...Defendant. --- Mr.Ajit Makhijani with Pratima Y. i/b. M.M.Legal Associates, for Plaintiff. Mr.Ajay Misar i/b. Ajay Misar & Co., for Defendant. CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH,J. DATED: 25th July, 2006. P.C.:- 1. The defendant has been served with the summons for judgment in March,2006. Till today there is no application for leave to defend is filed. The learned Counsel appearing for defendant seeks time to file affidavit but he is not in a position to give any reason as to why he could not file application for leave to defend within 10 days of 2 service of summons for judgment as required by the provisions of Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Code. As there is no application filed for leave to defend, in terms of Order 37 of C.P.C. the plaintiff becomes entitle to a judgment. 2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for plaintiff. Perused the record. The summons for judgment is granted. Suit is decreed in terms of prayer clause of the suit. Refund of Court fees as per rules. ---