1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT NO. 266 OF 2008 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1783 OF 2008 Deepak Kumar Babel .. Plaintiff versus Jasani Realty Pvt.Ltd. .. Defendant ... Mr.Simil Purohit with Mr.Manish Doshi i/b Vimadalal & Co. for the plaintiff. Ms.Lakshmi Murali for the defendant. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATED : 1st April 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Summons for Judgement is taken out by the plaintiff in a suit filed for recovery of a sum of Rs.59,35,000/-. The defendant has denied the receipt of any advance from the plaintiff and has further denied that sum of Rs.59,35,000/- or any part thereof is due by it to the plaintiff. 3. The case of the plaintiff is that the 2 plaintiff from time to time advanced to the defendant several sums of money as business loan without interest. The defendant from time to time made part payments. Regular accounts were maintained by the plaintiff and on 31st March 2005 an amount of Rs.59,35,000/- was due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. The defendant admitted the liability by signing acknowledgements, copies of which are at Exhibit-B1 to B4 to the plaint. The defendant failed to pay the balance and therefore the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of the amount due. 4. By filing an affidavit in reply, defendant has denied that it has borrowed any money from the plaintiff. So far as acknowledgements are concerned, the defendant has specifically denied execution of the acknowledgements. In paragraph no.5 of the affidavit in reply, the defendant has said "We state that we have not confirmed the said statement as alleged and the signatures appearing on the purported statements are forged to make this suit a viable proposition for the plaintiff". 5. By filing a rejoinder, the plaintiff has contended that the denial to the execution/signatures is sham and in fact the statements have been signed 3 by the defendant. 6. The defendant is a body corporate. It cannot therefore sign by itself and it can only sigh through authorised person like Managing Director, Director, Company Secretary or other Officer authorised in that behalf by the company. Though the defendant has specifically denied the signatures neither in the original affidavit or in the rejoinder the plaintiff has stated the name of the person allegedly signing the acknowledgement on behalf of the defendant company. In view of the specific denial of the signatures and the plaintiff was required to prove the signatures on the alleged acknowledgements. This is not done. Whether the signatures are of any Officer of the defendant or not cannot be decided at the stage of a Summons of Judgement but would obviously require oral evidence to be adduced by the parties. This gives rise to a triable issue. 7. In the circumstances, defendant is granted unconditional leave to defend the suit. Defendant shall file written statement within eight weeks. On such written statement being filed, suit shall stand transferred to the list of commercial causes. 4 (D.G. KARNIK, J)