1 42 ss.958.09 ndm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUMMARY SUIT NO. 958 OF 2009 M/s. Otarmal Kantilal and Company. ... Plaintiff Versus Mangesh Harishchandra Bhurke and anr. ... Defendants ----- Ms. Nisha Pawar i/b Tushar Goradia and Hrishikesh Nikumbh for the Plaintiff. None for the Defendants. ----- CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 10 th January, 2011. JUDGMENT : 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff. The suit is shown under the caption “for ex-parte decree”. The suit is filed by the Plaintiff on the basis of a Bill of Exchange, which was drawn by the 1 st defendant in consideration of Rs.80,000/-. Under the Bill of Exchange, the 2 nd defendant was directed to pay a sum of Rs.80,000/- on demand. On the same day, the bill was accepted by the 2 nd defendant. After the bill was presented to the 2 nd defendant, the same wad dishonoured for non payment. Thereafter, notice of demand was issued to the Defendants. 2 Original Bill of Exchange is placed on record alongwith an office copy of the notice of demand. 2 42 ss.958.09 3 The Defendants did not enter appearance after service of writ of summons. In view of sub-Rule (3) of Rule 2 of Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, the Plaintiff is entitled to judgment. The Plaintiff has claimed interest at the rate of 18% per annum. Considering the facts of the case, interest deserves to be granted at the rate of 10% per annum. 4 Hence, there shall be a decree as prayed subject to modification that interest will be payable at the rate of 10% per annum on the sum of Rs. 80,000/-. 5 The Plaintiff will be entitled to refund of Court-fees as per the rules. [ A.S.OKA, J ]