K. S. GUPTA ( 1 ) PLAINTIFF filed suit for recovery of Rs, 7,19. 695/34p being the balance amount of the monthly lease rentals and interest under order XXXVII CPC against the defendant. Summons in Form 4 in Appendix B CPC was issued to the defendant. Pursuant to the summons defendant filed IA No. 2047/92 under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (7) read with Section 151 CPC for condonation of delay in entering appearance. By the order dated July 17, 1992, delay was condoned and the plaintiff was ordered to take steps under the provisions of Order XXXVII Rule 4. CPC. On July 28, 1995 Ashok Kumar, Assistant Manager of the defendant-company, informed the Court that the parties have settled the matter in winding up petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and the suit may be dismissed. Shri Viplav Sharma appearing for the plaintiff sought adjournment for seeking instructions from the plaintiff in the matter and the case was accordingly adjourned to October 17, 1995. On October 17, 1995 as the Judge was on leave the case was postponed for February 7,1996. On that date the case was postponed to May 8, 1996, the Judge again on leave. In the meantime, the plaintiff filed IA No. 2336/96 under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (4) read with Section 151 CPC for issuing summons for judgment to the defendant, on the averments that the defendant had delivered post dated cheques through Punjab and Haryana High Court for a total sum of Rs. 6,33,332/q4p which did not include interest till date and the defendant is now liable to pay a sum of Rs. 5,82,047/24p inclusive of interest till December. 31,1995 and further interest @ 24% per annum. On February 24, 1997, suit came up for consideration before the Joint Registrar (0) and he passed the following order: Mr. A. Prasad States that this suit cannot be withdrawn by the plaintiff as some amount is yet to be paid to him by the defendant. If the defendant is aggrieved from failure of the plaintiff to withdraw the suit in terms of settlement before Punjab and Haryana High Court, it can file appropriate application in this regard. In the meanwhile, summons for judgment be issued to the defendant for 5. 5. 97 on filing of PFandrc within two weeks. If the defendant is aggrieved from failure of the plaintiff to withdraw the suit in terms of settlement before Punjab and Haryana High Court, it can file appropriate application in this regard. In the meanwhile, summons for judgment be issued to the defendant for 5. 5. 97 on filing of PFandrc within two weeks. " ( 2 ) ON May 5, 1997, defendant was found to be served with the summons for judgment on March 4, 1995 by the Joint Registrar (O) and as no application for leave to contest the suit was filed on behalf of the defendant, the matter has been placed before the Court today for orders. ( 3 ) SUBMISSION advanced by Ms. Kaira is that as the defendant was served with the summons for judgment on March 4,1995 and has not filed application for grant of leave to contest the suit till date, the plaintiff has become entitled to a decree in the sum of Rs. 5,82,047/24p with future interest under clause (a) of Rule 6 of Order XXXVII CPC, on the contrary claim for the said amount has been refuted by Ashok Kumar, Asstt. Manager of the defendant-company on the ground of the parties having arrived at a settlement in C. P. No. 6/92 in Punjab and Haryana High Court. Relevant portion of the order copy whereof was filed by the defendant in C. P. No. 6/92 dated December 10, 1993 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court reads thus. "counsel for the respondent had handed over the below mentioned cheques to the counsel for the Petitioner drawn in favour of M/s. Rustagi Hire Services; 922. htm Counsel for the petitioner had taken time to get instructions from his client. It has been stated by the counsel for the petitioner that his client is prepared to settle the dispute in full and final settlement of the dispute between the parties, if the aforementioned cheques are encahsed on presentation. This petition is, therefore, rendered infructuous and the same is disposed of as such, subject to the condition that if any one of the post dated cheques is dishonoured then the debt due shall be deemed to have been admitted by the respondent and the petition would be liable to be admitted and published. This petition is, therefore, rendered infructuous and the same is disposed of as such, subject to the condition that if any one of the post dated cheques is dishonoured then the debt due shall be deemed to have been admitted by the respondent and the petition would be liable to be admitted and published. It shall be open to the counsel for the petitioner to get this petition revived by filing an application, if any of the cheques is dishonoured. " (emphasis supplied) ( 4 ) IT may be noticed that in IA No. 2336/96 the plaintiff has admitted of having received the post-dated cheques through the Punjab and Haryana High Court for a total sum of Rs. 6,33,332/04p from the defendant. Correctness of the said order dated December 10, 1993, is also not disputed by the plaintiff. Since the post- dated cheques were received by the plaintiff from the defendant towards full and final settlement of the claim, the plaintiff cannot be heard to say now that the amount received by him through the post-dated cheques did not include interest and he is also entitled to claim the same from the defendant. It is true that despite service of summons for judgment on March 4, 1995, defendant has not filed application for leave to defend the suit but merely because of that lapse in view of the above facts the plaintiff cannot claim a decree for the amount noted in aforesaid IA No. 2336/96. Suit is, therefore, dismissed as having been fully satisfied.