PRINKLE MAHAJAN Vs. SHOBA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed in this Court challenging order dated 26.09.2017 passed by the learned Court below whereby an application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay in filing application for setting aside of ex-parte decree was dismissed and as a consequence main application was also dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that a lease deed was executed between Shoba and M/s Lahori Nissan Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the lessee') on 26.08.2013.Vide aforesaid lease deed, the lessee had taken on lease a building owned by Shoba. The appellant had signed the aforesaid lease deed on behalf of the lessee as an authorized signatory. For the purpose of execution of lease deed, lessee had authorized the appellant by way of resolution passed on 10.08.2013. Ever since the building was taken on lease, its rentals were being paid by the lessee and the account was being maintained in its books of accounts.

(3.) The respondent filed a suit of recovery of Rs. 5,19,777/- against the appellant pleading that the appellant had taken the property on lease and failed to pay the lease money. It came up for hearing before the Court below on 03.06.2017. On the very first date of hearing all modes were directed to be adopted for service of the appellant without first starting with the normal mode of service. On the next date of hearing, recording that the appellant/defendant is avoiding service, he was directed to be proceeded against ex-parte. Evidence was recorded and within four months of institution of the suit, the same was decreed. The moment appellant came to know about the ex-parte decree, he filed application for setting aside thereof along with an application seeking condonation of delay of 17 days in filing the same. Learned Court below vide impugned order dated 26.09.2017, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay also dismissed the main application. Though the Court had taken less than four months in decreeing the suit for recovery of huge sum of amount whereas on the other side for decision of the application for condonation of delay it had taken more than one year.