--O.XXXVII,R.1---Suit for recovery of money--- Object, scope and purpose---Real benefit of suit under O.XXXVII, C.P.C. is that unless defendant is able to demonstrate a substantial defence in the case, plaintiff is entitled to judgment forthwith-

 2021 M L D 1473
[Lahore]
Before Anwaar Hussain, J
MUHAMMAD JAVED AZMI---Petitioner
Versus
JAVED ARSHAD---Respondent
Civil Revision No.31217 of 2021, decided on 19th May, 2021.

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---

----O.XXXVII,R.1---Suit for recovery of money--- Object, scope and purpose---Real benefit of suit under O.XXXVII, C.P.C. is that unless defendant is able to demonstrate a substantial defence in the case, plaintiff is entitled to judgment forthwith---Public policy behind suits under O.XXXVII, C.P.C. is expeditious disposal of suit involving financial matters---In suit under O.XXXVII, C.P.C. till such time leave to appear and defend is allowed, the defendant cannot file any other interlocutory application.

Khalid Mehmood v. Additional District Judge, West Islamabad and 2 others 2021 MLD 264; Syed Itrat Hussain Rizvi v. Messrs Tameer Micro Finance Bank Limited through Attorney and another 2018 CLD 116; National Transmission and Dispatch Company Limited (NTDC) through Dul Authorized Legal Advisor v. Trust Investment Bank Limited 2017 MLD 1304; Farooque Ahmed v. Raza Muhammad PLD 2007 Kar. 182 and Messrs United Distributors Pakistan Limited v. Ahmad Zarie Services and another 1997 MLD 1835 rel.

(b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---

----O.XXXVII, Rr.2 & 3---Suit for recovery of money on the basis of negotiable instrument---Leave to defend the suit---Pre-conditions--- Summoning of bank record---Respondent-plaintiff sought recovery of money on the basis of dishonoured cheque---Application for leave to defend the suit filed by petitioner-defendant was dismissed by Trial Court after consulting record summoned from Bank---Validity---In order to satisfy itself to the contents of leave to appear and defend, the Court was required not to act in a mechanical manner---Trial Court had to apply its judicial mind to the contents of application for leave to appear and defend---Trial Court was not debarred to probe and conduct such inquiry so as to satisfy itself as to the genuineness and plausibility of defence of defendant---Plaintiff in such suit was not debarred to move application for summoning a document in custody of any person which prima facie would establish before Court that defence taken in application for leave to appear in summary suit was sham and illusory---Trial Court rightly summoned record from Bank duly supported by an affidavit to controvert stance of petitioner-defendant---Revision was dismissed in circumstances.