Defendant denied leave to defend, must deposit sum within 8 weeks to avoid decree.

The defendant was denied leave to defend in a case involving a claim of Rs. 1,21,71,243 due to presenting an insufficient defense. The court required the defendant to deposit a specified amount within eight weeks to secure the plaintiff's claim. Failure to do so resulted in a Non-Deposit Certificate being issued, leading to a decree in favor of the plaintiff for the claimed amount and additional interest. The plaintiff was also granted costs under Section 35 of the CPC, with court fees paid and estimated litigation costs awarded promptly.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Entitlement to leave to defend and deposit requirement.
2. Claim details and defense arguments.
3. Evidence submission and decree for the plaintiff.
4. Decree for costs under Section 35 of CPC.

Entitlement to Leave to Defend and Deposit Requirement:
The judgment by AK Menon J highlighted that the defense presented was considered "moonshine," leading to the conclusion that the defendant was not entitled to leave to defend unless securing the plaintiff's claim by depositing a specified amount within eight weeks. The failure to make the deposit resulted in a Non-Deposit Certificate being issued, establishing the plaintiff's entitlement to a decree against the defendant.

Claim Details and Defense Arguments:
The suit involved a claim of Rs. 1,21,71,243, comprising a principal sum and interest arising from dishonored cheques. The plaintiff contended that an amount was advanced to the defendant for business purposes, with repayment terms specified. Despite attempts by the defendant to contest liability, the affidavit filed admitted receipt of funds but claimed an oral agreement for repayment after 30 months, which was deemed an attempt to avoid liability. The defense was deemed insufficient, leading to the order for deposit and denial of leave to defend without securing the plaintiff's claim.

Evidence Submission and Decree for the Plaintiff:
The plaintiff submitted evidence through the Vice President and Company Secretary, confirming the correctness of the evidence affidavit and providing necessary documents. Consequently, the suit was decreed against the defendant for the claimed amount, with additional interest on the principal sum. The plaintiff was also granted costs under Section 35 of the CPC, with court fees paid and estimated litigation costs awarded.

Decree for Costs under Section 35 of CPC:
Given the commercial nature of the suit, the plaintiff was entitled to costs under Section 35 of the CPC. The court fees were paid, and reasonable litigation costs were estimated and awarded to the plaintiff. The decree for costs was specified without interest, and the drawn-up decree was expedited, allowing the plaintiff to move for execution without delay.

---