SH. RAJEEV SETHI Vs. SIDHARTH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, defendant seeks condonation of delay of 165 days in refiling the leave to defend application.

(2.) Though in the application the defendant has interchangeably used the words 'delay in filing' and 'delay in refiling' however, a perusal of the record reveals that summons in the suit under Order XXXVII were issued to the defendant on 31/5/2017 returnable on 25/7/2017 on which date learned counsel for the defendant entered appearance and filed his memo of appearance and vakalatnama. Thereafter the plaintiff filed the application being I.A. No.11865/2017 under Order XXXVII Rule 3(4) CPC seeking issuance of summons for judgment against the defendant which was issued on 13/10/2017. In the report dtd. 17/11/2017 it was noted that summons for judgment issued to the defendant were still awaited.

(3.) Learned counsel for the defendant entered appearance on 17/11/2017 and stated that he had not received the summons for judgment however, as the learned counsel for the defendant had entered appearance and there was deemed service, the application seeking leave to defendant was to be filed within the statutory period thereafter.