((-1-)) mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.903 OF 2008 M/s.Otarmal Kantilal & Co. Plaintiffs versus Mohan Eknath Devrukhkar and another Defendants Ms.Nisha Parmar i/by Tushar Goradia & Nisha Parmar for plaintiffs. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 05th December 2008 PC : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs. The office endorsement shows that the summons under Sub Rule 2 of Rule 2 of Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been duly served to the defendants and an affidavit of service has been filed. It is stated that the defendants have not entered the appearance. 2. The suit filed by the plaintiffs under Order XXXVII of the said Code of 1908 is based on a bill of exchange. The said bill of exchange was drawn by the first defendant which ((-2-)) was accepted by the second defendant. However, the bill of exchange was dishonoured by the second defendant. As the defendants failed and neglected to pay the amount payable under the bill of exchange, present suit has been filed. The original bill of exchange has been produced on record along with an office copy of the notice of demand. 3. The plaintiff is entitled to a decree as prayed for. The plaintiff has prayed for further interest @ 18% p.a.. The further interest will have to be fixed @ 10% p.a.. 4. Hence, the suit is decreed as prayed with a modification that the further interest payable will be @ 10% p.a.. 5. The plaintiff will be entitled to refund of court fees as per rules. Certified copy is expedited. (A.S.OKA, J.)