Invoices with printed terms can form a written contract in summary suits; conditional leave to defend upheld on admitted liability.

In a summary suit, a series of invoices carrying printed terms, together with repeated dealings, written acknowledgments of liability and dishonoured cheques, can constitute a written contract sufficient to attract Order XXXVII CPC. The defendants' documentary admissions and the statutory presumption arising from the dishonoured cheques meant their denial of liability was not a bona fide full defence, so leave to defend was granted only conditionally on deposit of the admitted amount with interest. Non-impleadment of the agent did not defeat the claim because the principal relationship was already apparent and the agent was not a necessary party on the facts.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether invoices containing printed terms could constitute a written contract for the purposes of a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. (ii) Whether the defendants disclosed a real defence warranting unconditional leave to defend, or whether the defence was illusory. (iii) Whether non-impleadment of the agent defeated the claim or the summary procedure.

Issue (i): Whether invoices containing printed terms could constitute a written contract for the purposes of a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The invoices were not isolated documents but formed part of a series of commercial transactions between the parties. The terms printed on the reverse of the invoices, together with the repeated course of dealing and the surrounding documentary record, were treated as sufficient to show a written contract within the summary procedure. The presence of written acknowledgments and dishonoured cheques reinforced the contractual basis of the claim.

Conclusion: Yes. The invoices and accompanying documents constituted a written contract sufficient to attract Order XXXVII.

Issue (ii): Whether the defendants disclosed a real defence warranting unconditional leave to defend, or whether the defence was illusory.

Analysis: The defendants' own letters repeatedly admitted liability and confirmed outstanding balances. The dishonoured cheques attracted the presumption of consideration, and no satisfactory explanation was offered for the alleged withdrawal of authority of the signatory or for the continued possession and issuance of cheque books. The defence that authority had been withdrawn was found to be unsupported and inconsistent with the documentary record, while the objections regarding running account and alleged absence of consideration were not accepted at this stage. On the other hand, the material did not justify an outright decree without affording a limited opportunity to contest, subject to securing the admitted amount.

Conclusion: The defence was not a bona fide full defence; leave to defend was granted only conditionally.

Issue (iii): Whether non-impleadment of the agent defeated the claim or the summary procedure.

Analysis: The defendants were aware of the principal relationship, and the agency arrangement did not make the agent a necessary party for adjudication of the admitted liability. The contract principles governing agency did not require impleadment of the agent in the facts presented.

Conclusion: No. Non-impleadment of the agent did not defeat the claim.

Final Conclusion: The defendants were permitted to defend only on terms of deposit of the quantified amount with interest, and failing compliance the suit was to follow the ordinary consequence in favour of the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi: In a summary suit, a series of invoices carrying identical terms, coupled with written acknowledgments of liability and dishonoured cheques, can establish a written contract and justify only conditional leave to defend where the defence is unsupported or sham.

---