ROOP LAL Vs. EDMOND INTERNATIONAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . This is an application filed on behalf of the defendant under Order XXXVII Rule 3 (7) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure(in short Code) for condonation of delay in filing the appearance. In this application it has been stated that the defendant came to know for the first time on 26.8.88 about this case when one of the partners of the defendant-firm happened to visit the office of their counsel in connection with another case. It has further been stated that after inspection of Court records it was revealed that the summons were served upon one Mr. Gupta on 6.7.88 who was neither a partner nor an employee of the defendant-firm as he had left employment on 30th June, 1988. It has also been stated that after inspection of record, one of the partners was confined to bed due to viral fever and the other partner was already away to Jaipur and the present application was being filed with due promptitude and it has been prayed that the delay in filing appearance be condoned.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff had filed the present suit against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 2,03,037/77p under Order XXXVII of the Code. As per the report of the process server, the defendant was served on 6th July, 1988. Since the defendant failed to enter appearance within the stipultated period, the Deputy Registrar by his order dated 19th August, 1988 directed that the suit be listed before the Court on 8th September, 1988.

(3.) Meanwhile, the defendant filed the present application bearing IA No.6106/88 which was also listed before the Court on 8.9.88 and on that date the plaintiff was directed to file reply to this application. The application came up for hearing before the Court on 2.12.88 and it was observed that it was not possible to decide this application without evidence being recorded on the disputed question of fact arising in this application. Accordingly, the Deputy Registrar was directed to record the evidence and thereafter place the matter before the Court. Pursuant to the said order, the evidence of the parties was recorded. Thereafter arguments on this application were heard on 24.9.93 and 4.11.93.