((-1-)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO.352 OF 2004 Kanji Ramji Kacha Plaintiff versus Pravinchandra M. Kanani Defendant Sualeh Nagvadaria for plaintiff. None for defendant. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 4th July 2005 PC : 1. Heard Mr.Nagvadaria for the plaintiff. He tenders affidavit proving service of the writ of summons on the defendant. The said affidavit points out that the packet containing writ of summons was duly dispatched by the Sheriff of Mumbai and postal authorities have informed that it was not claimed by the defendant. Thereupon, intimation was sent by the postal authorities as evidenced by the endorsement on the packet. Thus, the writ of summons has duly been served. 2. Mr.Nagvadaria contends that the plaintiff had ((-2-)) advanced an amount of Rs.50,000/- and a promissory note was executed by defendant on 17th December 1998. 3. The defendant forwarded three cheques on 17th December 2001 acknowledging the liability to the plaintiff as per the promissory note. As these cheques have been dishonoured on presentation, present summary suit is filed on the basis of the promissory note and also on the basis of the admitted liability and dishonoured cheques. It is maintainable as a summary suit. The claim is not barred by limitation in the light of averments contained in paras 5 and 13 of the plaint. There is no defence to the claim. 4. In the light of the above, decree as prayed. Refund of court fee and computation of advocates’ costs as per rules. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)