Triable issues in a summary suit justified unconditional leave to defend where the core acknowledgment was disputed.

In a summary suit under Chapter XIIIA, unconditional leave to defend is warranted where the defendant discloses a bona fide defence or triable issues requiring evidence. The High Court found that the defendant specifically denied the genuineness of the core acknowledgment relied on by the plaintiff, and disputes on limitation and jurisdiction also arose from the challenged document. Because the defence could not be characterised as sham, illusory, or moonshine, the disputed facts had to be tried, and unconditional leave to defend was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the defendant had disclosed triable issues entitling him to unconditional leave to defend in the summary suit under Chapter XIIIA.

Analysis: Leave to defend under Chapter XIIIA depends on whether the defendant satisfies the Court that he has a good defence on merits or discloses facts sufficient to entitle him to defend. Where the defence raises a triable issue requiring evidence, summary judgment is not warranted. On the pleadings and affidavits, the genuineness of the core acknowledgment relied on by the plaintiff was specifically denied, and questions of limitation and jurisdiction also arose from the disputed document. The defence could not be characterised as wholly sham, illusory, or moonshine, and the disputed facts required trial.

Conclusion: The defendant was entitled to unconditional leave to defend, and the appeal succeeded.

---