$~59 to 61 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010423642026 + FAO 286/2026 and CM APPL. 60817/2026 RAJINDER KAUR @ BOBBY .....Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Mr. Viral Vaibhav, Mr. Rishabh, Advocates (M:8882071119). versus NAVEEN RAWAT .....Respondent Through: None. # CNR No. DLHC010423862026 + FAO 288/2026 and CM APPL. 60838/2026 RAJINDER KAUR @ BOBBY .....Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Mr. Viral Vaibhav, Mr. Rishabh, Advocates (M:8882071119). versus SEEMA .....Respondent Through: None. # CNR No. DLHC010423952026 + FAO 289/2026 and CM APPL. 60841/2026 RAJINDER KAUR @ BOBBY .....Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Sharma, Mr. Viral Vaibhav, Mr. Rishabh, Advocates (M:8882071119). versus MANGAT RAM SHARMA .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 09.09.2026 CM APPL. 60818/2026, CM APPL. 60839/2026 & CM APPL. 60842/2026 (Exemption applications) 1. Exemption applications are allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/09/2026 at 12:06:08 2. The applications stand disposed of. CM APPL. 60819/2026, CM APPL. 60840/2026 & CM APPL. 60843/2026 (Condonation of Delay in refiling) 1. For the reasons stated in the applications, the respective delays in re- filing the appeals are condoned. 2. The applications stand disposed of. FAO 286/2026, FAO 288/2026 & FAO 289/2026. 1. The present appeals have been preferred against the orders dated 08.06.2026 passed by the learned ADJ-03, South-East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, in Misc. DJ Nos. 681/2023, 682/2023 and 680/2023, respectively. 2. Vide the aforesaid orders, the Trial Court allowed the applications filed by the appellant under Order XXXVII Rule 4 read with Section 151 CPC and set aside the ex parte judgments and decrees dated 15.07.2022, however, subject to the condition that the appellant deposit 50% of the respective cheque amounts. Consequently, the respective execution petitions were also disposed of. Since the appellant is common in all three appeals and common submissions have been advanced, the appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Notably, three separate summary suits were instituted by the respective respondents/plaintiffs against the appellant for recovery of Rs.10,00,000/-, Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/-, respectively. The suits were founded upon cheques allegedly issued by the appellant towards discharge of the respective liabilities, which, upon presentation, came to be dishonoured. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/09/2026 at 12:06:08 4. On the appellant’s failure to appear despite being served with summons for judgment, the respective suits came to be decreed under Order XXXVII Rule 3(6)(a) CPC, 1908. During the execution proceedings, when warrants of attachment were sought to be executed, the appellant appeared and thereafter moved the subject applications in the underlying suits seeking setting aside of the ex parte decrees. The appellant raised different defences in the three proceedings. In the proceedings instituted by Naveen Rawat, the appellant admitted having availed a loan of Rs.10,00,000/- but claimed that the same had already been repaid along with interest and that the signed blank security cheques had been misused. In the proceedings instituted by Seema and Mangat Ram Sharma, the appellant disputed the underlying liability and alleged that the cheques had been stolen and/or that the particulars therein and her signatures had been forged. 5. The only contention raised in the present appeals is that the applications under Order XXXVII Rule 4 CPC, though allowed, have been made subject to the condition that the appellant deposit 50% of the decretal amount. The provisions of Order XXXVII contemplate that an application seeking leave to defend is to be filed within ten days of the service of summons for judgment. Upon consideration of such application, the Court may grant unconditional leave to defend, grant conditional leave subject to such terms as may be deemed fit, or refuse leave where no substantial or triable defence is disclosed. 6. The Trial Court, though observing that the defence raised by the appellant was probable but weak, allowed the applications subject to the condition of granting conditional leave to defend. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/09/2026 at 12:06:08 7. At this stage, it is noted that the principles governing grant of leave to defend in a summary suit have been authoritatively laid down by the Supreme Court in IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. v. Hubtown Ltd1. Where the defence raises triable issues but the Court entertains a doubt regarding the defendant's good faith or the genuineness of such triable issues, the Court is empowered to impose conditions, including as to deposit or furnishing of security. Further, where the defence is plausible but improbable, the condition of deposit or security may extend even to the entire principal sum. 8. In the considered opinion of this Court, and in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the condition imposed by the Trial Court cannot be said to be vague or perverse. The appellant has failed to demonstrate any ground warranting interference with the impugned orders. 9. Accordingly, the impugned orders are upheld and the appeals are dismissed. 10. Pending applications, are accordingly, disposed of. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2026/sn 1 (2017) 1 SCC 568 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/09/2026 at 12:06:08