R.M. ENTERPRISES Vs. RADHEY SHAM GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This first appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1(d) CPC impugns the order of the Trial court dated 26.9.2013 by which the application of the appellant/applicant/defendant under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree dated 29.7.2002 was dismissed. The suit was a suit filed for recovery of money for goods supplied.

(2.) The court below has dismissed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC by giving the following findings:-

(3.) Before me, counsel for the appellant argues that unless there is postal receipt showing pre-payment of the registered cover charges, trial court fell into an error in taking the factum with regard to service by means of registered post on account of the report of postal authorities of 'refusal'. It was also argued that appellant-defendant has rebutted the presumption by filing an affidavit with respect to non-service.