IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL NO.433 OF 2009 IN SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.274 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1638 OF 2008 Manohar Laxman Vaidhya & Sons and another. ... Appellants Versus Auro Gold Jewellery Pvt.Ltd. and another. ... Respondents Mr. A.G. Damle for the appellants. Mr. M.D. Mali for the respondent No.1. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : 7TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We are unable to find any error of law in the impugned order. The learned Single Judge has exercised discretion and in any case, the pleas raised before us would depend on the evidence that may be led by the parties during the course of the trial. It is an interim order which is otherwise just and equitable in the fact situation of the present case. The appellants have been asked to deposit only 50% of the amount claimed and have been granted leave to defend. The mere fact that the complaint has been filed by the appellants before the learned Magistrate claiming that there was undue influence under which he had signed the papers is not of much consequence in asmuch as signing of the documents is admitted. Onus to prove that the documents were signed in duress will be on the appellant in the suit whereas complaint itself has been filed two years after the signatures were allegedly so taken. We see no reason to interfere. Dismissed. 3. Any observation made in the order would be subject to the final decision of the suit. As prayed, amount specified in the impugned order be deposited within six weeks from today. CHIEF JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.