https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194458 A special statutory procedure under the Bombay Money-lenders Act, 1946 was treated as incompatible with summary procedure under Order XXXVII CPC because Sections 21 and 29 imposed mandatory duties on the court to frame and decide issues and to take accounts or make adjustments in suits covered by the Act. Since a conditional leave regime would prevent effective participation by the defendant in proceedings where those statutory duties had to be performed, the commentary concludes that unconditional leave to defend was required. Section 30 was viewed as a separate, permissive debtor's right and not a basis to dilute the mandatory obligations under Sections 21 and 29. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Sep 2017 17:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194458 A special statutory procedure under the Bombay Money-lenders Act, 1946 was treated as incompatible with summary procedure under Order XXXVII CPC because Sections 21 and 29 imposed mandatory duties on the court to frame and decide issues and to take accounts or make adjustments in suits covered by the Act. Since a conditional leave regime would prevent effective participation by the defendant in proceedings where those statutory duties had to be performed, the commentary concludes that unconditional leave to defend was required. Section 30 was viewed as a separate, permissive debtor's right and not a basis to dilute the mandatory obligations under Sections 21 and 29. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 30 Jun 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194458