1 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 66 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1486 OF 2004 Nandlal Lakhumal Ragoowanshi .. Plaintiff V/s M/s Perfect Steel & Cement Agency & Anr. .. Defendants Ms. Kavita S. Latwani for the plaintiff. Mr. R.M. Haridas for the defendants. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 16TH JULY 2009 P.C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The suit has been filed by the plaintiff for recovery of the loan alleged to have been advanced to the defendants and unpaid by them. 3. In my view, the suit is not triable as a summary suit. The suit is not based on a negotiable instrument. The defendants have not issued a negotiable instrument in favour of the plaintiff. 2 3. The contention of the plaintiff is that the loan was advanced by means of a cheque and, therefore, the suit is based on negotiable instrument. In Purnima Jaitly v. Ravi Bansi Jaisingh, 2004 (1) Mh.L.J. 114, I have already held that such a suit cannot be held to be a suit based on negotiable instrument. My view has been affirmed by a Full Bench of this Court in Jyotsna K. Valia v. T.S. Parekh & Co., 2007 (4) Mh. L.J. 517 (para 26). 4. In view of the above, the defendants are granted unconditional leave to defend the suit. The suit shall stand transferred to the list of commercial causes. The defendants shall file the written statement within 12 weeks. 5. The summons for judgment is disposed of. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)