https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380884 In a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, the defence was held not to be bona fide because the defendant had signed successive written agreements and a memorandum of settlement expressly acknowledging liability and the outstanding amount. Part-payments and issuance of post-dated cheques supported the claim, while allegations of coercion, pressure and undue influence were rejected as unsupported by any contemporaneous complaint or legal action over a prolonged period. Applying the test for leave to defend, the defence was treated as sham and moonshine and no triable issue was disclosed. Unconditional leave to defend was therefore declined and the refusal to grant leave was upheld. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2019 09:03:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380884 In a summary suit under Order XXXVII CPC, the defence was held not to be bona fide because the defendant had signed successive written agreements and a memorandum of settlement expressly acknowledging liability and the outstanding amount. Part-payments and issuance of post-dated cheques supported the claim, while allegations of coercion, pressure and undue influence were rejected as unsupported by any contemporaneous complaint or legal action over a prolonged period. Applying the test for leave to defend, the defence was treated as sham and moonshine and no triable issue was disclosed. Unconditional leave to defend was therefore declined and the refusal to grant leave was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380884