Conditional leave to defend failed on non-deposit, entitling the plaintiff to decree, interest, and costs in a commercial suit.

Where leave to defend was made conditional on securing the plaintiff's claim because the defence was found to be moonshine, failure to make the ordered deposit within time entitled the plaintiff to judgment. With the non-deposit certificate taken on file, the plaintiff obtained a decree for the claimed sum, further interest on the principal amount, and costs. In the commercial suit context, costs were awarded under the amended costs provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on failure to deposit the amount directed as a condition for leave to defend, the plaintiff was entitled to a decree and costs.

Analysis: Leave to defend had earlier been made conditional on securing the plaintiff's claim because the defence was found to be moonshine. No deposit was made within the time granted, and the non-deposit certificate was taken on file. In these circumstances, the plaintiff became entitled to judgment and decree for the claim amount, together with further interest on the principal sum. As this was a commercial suit, costs were also awarded under the amended provision governing costs.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was entitled to a decree against the defendant for the claimed sum, interest, and costs.

---