What is the main point of this case?

The Supreme Court clarified that in summary suits under Order 37 CPC, courts should grant leave to defend when the defence shows a real, not sham, issue.

Does the defendant need to prove the defence at leave stage?

No. The test is whether the defence is bona fide and raises a triable issue; strict proof is not required at this stage.

How do Rules 2 and 3(1) of Order 37 CPC work together?

Rule 2 is strict, but Rule 3(1) softens it by requiring courts to grant leave when conditions are met, using fair judicial discretion.

What did the Supreme Court finally do?

It set aside the High Court and trial court orders and remanded the case for trial so the defendants could put up their defence.

Why is this decision important for students and lawyers?

It shows how natural justice shapes discretion in summary suits and prevents judgments against parties who may succeed if allowed to prove their case.

Santosh Kumar v. Bhai Mool Singh, AIR 1958

Santosh Kumar v. Bhai Mool Singh, AIR 1958 SC 321

Supreme Court of India India 1958 AIR 1958 SC 321 CPC — Summary Suits ~6 min read

CASE_TITLE Author: Gulzar Hashmi India PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: Order 37 CPC, Leave to Defend SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: Summary Suit, Bona Fide Defence, Rule 2, Rule 3(1) PUBLISH_DATE: 05-Oct-2023

```

Quick Summary

This case explains how courts should handle leave to defend in summary suits under Order 37 CPC. If the defence shows a real issue and looks genuine, leave should be granted. A defendant need not fully prove the case at this early stage.

Rule 2 is strict, but Rule 3(1) softens it with fair discretion.
The test is: real, not sham, issue + bona fide defence.
The matter was remanded so the defence could be tried.

Issues

Did the defendants raise a real, not sham, issue to get leave to defend under Order 37 CPC?

Rules

Order 37 Rule 2 CPC — summary procedure for specified claims.
Order 37 Rule 3(1) CPC — court must grant leave when conditions are met.
Articles 227 & 136 — supervisory and special leave powers.

Judicial discretion must follow natural justice and not shut out a genuine defence.

Facts (Timeline)

View images

Suit

Summary Suit on Cheque

Plaintiff filed a summary suit based on a cheque of ₹60,000. The cheque was dishonoured.

Leave Stage

Leave to Defend Refused

Trial judge said there was a triable issue but refused leave, saying no material showed the defence was bona fide.

High Court

Article 227 Dismissed

Delhi Circuit Bench of the Punjab High Court dismissed the challenge.

Supreme Court

SLP under Article 136

The appellants moved the Supreme Court, arguing that the defence raised a real issue and should not be shut out.

Timeline showing summary suit, refusal of leave, HC dismissal, and Supreme Court SLP

Arguments

Appellants (Defendants)

They raised a triable issue; leave should be granted.
Demanding proof at leave stage violates the summary scheme.
Natural justice requires a fair chance to defend.

Respondent (Plaintiff)

Defence was not shown to be bona fide.
Summary procedure aims at quick relief on negotiable instruments.
Trial judge used discretion; no interference needed.

Judgment

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal. It held that the courts must grant leave to defend when the defence raises a real issue. Refusing leave because the defendant did not first prove the defence was wrong.

High Court and trial court orders set aside.
Case remanded to the trial court for full hearing.

Judgment visual: leave to defend granted; matter remanded for trial

Ratio (Legal Principle)

In an Order 37 summary suit, if the defence is bona fide and discloses a triable issue, the court must grant leave to defend. Judicial discretion should align with natural justice and not demand strict proof at the leave stage.

Why It Matters

Prevents unfair judgments when the defendant may have a solid case.
Balances speed of summary suits with fairness.
Guides trial courts on applying Rule 3(1) with compassion and logic.

Key Takeaways

Triable Issue

If a real issue appears, grant leave; do not insist on full proof now.

Discretion

Use discretion on judicial lines — natural justice first.

Rule 2 + Rule 3(1)

Strict entry rule, softened by fair leave to defend.

Protection

Stops injustice where the defendant could succeed at trial.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “REAL → LEAVE → TRIAL”

Real: Spot a real, not sham, issue.
Leave: Grant leave under Rule 3(1).
Trial: Decide after full evidence.

IRAC Outline

Issue: Should leave to defend be granted in an Order 37 summary suit?

Rule: Order 37 Rules 2 & 3(1) CPC; judicial discretion guided by natural justice.

Application: Defence showed a triable issue; refusing leave because it was not yet proved was improper.

Conclusion: Leave to defend allowed; case remanded for trial.

Glossary

Summary Suit: A fast-track suit for specified claims (like cheques) under Order 37 CPC.
Leave to Defend: Permission to contest the suit; granted when a real defence is shown.
Bona Fide Defence: A good-faith defence with substance, not a sham or delay tactic.