: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.514 OF 2007 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO.1387 OF 2006 Axis Bank Ltd. ....Plaintiff V/s. Sanjaykumar S. Shyam & Anr. ....Defendants Mr.A.R. Bamne for the Plaintiff. Ms.Kanchand Kambli i/b Vandana for Defendant No.2. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 30TH AUGUST, 2008. P.C. : 1. The suit is filed to recover the amounts lent and advanced by the Plaintiff to Defendant No.1. Defendant No.2 is the guarantor. The present Summons for Judgment has been taken out only against the guarantor, as the Plaintiff has been unable to serve Defendant No.1 in the regular course. An order for substituted service has been passed in respect of Defendant No.1. 2. Defendant No.2 is sued in his capacity as the guarantor in respect of the said loan. That the amounts have been lent and advanced is established. A promissory note has been executed by Defendant No.1 evidencing the same. That the guarantee has been : 2 : signed by Defendant No.2 is admitted. The only contention is that Defendant No.2 signed the guarantee under the misrepresentation that he was merely witnessing the signature of Defendant No.1. This contention is unsustainable. There is nothing that establishes the same. 3. It was argued that Defendant No.2 has filed the suit in this Court for a declaration that some of the documents pertaining to the transaction are void. The mere filing of the suit would not make a difference. 4. There is no defence to the suit. In the circumstances, the Summons for Judgment is made absolute and the suit is decreed as against Defendant No.2 as prayed. However, interest after the date of the suit shall be at the rate of 12% p.a. on the principle sum of Rs.3,00,000/-