JAGDISH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners impugn the order dtd. 21/3/2024, whereby the application under Order IX Rule 7 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ["CPC"] was dismissed subject to costs of Rs.10,000.00 on the ground that there was delay in filing the application and the application was without any merits.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that under the Limitation Act, 1908, no period is prescribed for filing the application for setting aside the ex parte order. It has been submitted that non-appearance of counsel on the date of hearing was neither intentional not deliberate. It is further submitted that petitioner No. 2 is a senior citizen aged about 79 years and is suffering from health issues due to which he was not in a position to appear in Court. Similarly, respondent No. 4 is also a senior citizen, living in a remote village of Haryana and owing to his health, was unable to travel for long duration. As regards, petitioner No. 3, it has been submitted that he is a practicing doctor in Gurugram, Haryana and due to exigencies of his work, he could not appear and had instructed his counsel to appear.

(3.) It has also been submitted that the main counsel, Mr. Y.S. Narula was unwell on 5/4/2024 and had to undergo haemorrhoidectomy with fissurectomy surgery on 20/4/2024, due to which he remained in ICU till 22/4/2024, whereafter although he was relieved from the hospital, but was advised strict bed rest for 20 days. It is submitted that it took about a month for the counsel to recover from illness and resume work, due to which reason the application could not be filed prior to this date.