1. There are two applications for leave to appear and defend the suit. So far as the application filed by defendants Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 is concerned, the only , contention raised by the learned counsel is that accounts have not been properly maintained. Nothing has been placed on record in support of this assertion. On the other hand, the plaintiff has placed on record certain documents signed by the defendants along with statement of accounts which is certified on oath under the Bankers'
2. Books Evidence Act and carries presumption of truth, Therefore, application for leave to appear and defend the suit filed by defendants Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5 is dismissed.
2. The other application is by defendant No,2 whose case is that he was an employee of the company and originally stood guarantor but subsequently he was substituted by Asif Sehgal, a Director of the company, on 21-8-1995. This fact is supported prima facie by the memorandum of amendment of offer letter dated 31-3-1995 which was signed by the debtors as also by the guarantors. Though the name of Kamran Zali has been typed on the documents it does not bear his signatures. This defendant has, therefore, disclosed a triable issue and is granted leave to appear and defend the suit.
3. ' In view of what has been stated above, interim decree for recovery of Rs,35,705,695 is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 5.
4. ' Written statement shall be filed by defendant No,2 within two weeks. For framing of issues to come up on 21-9-1999.