1 sj392.10.sxw ssm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 392 OF 2010 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 3178 OF 2006 Popatlal M. Gala ......Plaintiff. Vs. T.P.H. Corporation & Ors. ......Defendants. Mr. Jerestin Sidhwa i/by M/s. K.V. Chheda & Co. for the Plaintiff. Mr. V.M. Bharadwaj for Defendant No.1. Mr. S.G. Lakhani for Defendant Nos. 3, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 12. Mr. Parag Joshi i/by Mr. Bipin Joshi for Defendant No.14. Ms. Vaishali Ugale i/by Mr. V.Y. Sanglikar for Defendant No.16. CORAM :- ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATE :- 11/11/2011. P.C.:- This Summary Suit is filed by the Plaintiff based upon the Acknowledgment Receipt dated 1 August 2002 Exhibit “A", alleged to be signed by deceased Hiralal, partner of Defendant No.1. The Suit is dated 27 September 2006 based upon two alleged hand written acknowledgments for the period 1 August 2002 to 31 March 2003 and 1 April 2003 to 31 October 2003 which were alleged to have been initialled by deceased Hiralal, as the amount was paid as mentioned. Defendant No.1 and its existing partners have disputed the liability as 2 sj392.10.sxw ssm well as the initials. The deceased partner Hiralal's son has filed affidavit and even denied the initials and stated it to be fabricated one. 2 In the affidavit /rejoinder filed by the Plaintiff, the averments are made that the amount was paid by the deceased Hiralal, but there is nothing to show or justify by averments and/or by any documents that the same amount was paid by the deceased Hiralal and initialled as alleged at the back of the documents. Even otherwise, such document and/or initial of any party cannot be treated as a signed acknowledgment and/or document as contemplated and as referred and relied on the basis of judgment of a Full Bench of this Court in Jyotsna K. Valia Vs. T.S. Parekh & Co. 1 . 3 The signature and the initial in question, in my view, goes to the root of the matter and therefore, I am not inclined to accept the case of the Plaintiff that the present Summons for Judgment be allowed on the basis of the same. The concept of the acknowledgment of liability even though is settled by the Full Bench of this Court, still facts and aspects of disputed initials and/or to treat initial as a final 1 2007(4) Mh.L.J. 517 3 sj392.10.sxw ssm and binding signature, are need to be considered in the trial. 4 Therefore, in my view, the defence so raised is bonafide and genuine and can only be considered at the final stage of the Suit. 5 In view of above, the Summons for Judgment is disposed of. The Suit be transferred to the list of commercial causes in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)