1. The appellants challenge the order dated 10.10.2017 passed by
the learned Single Judge, which rejected two applications filed by
the appellants, one under Section 151 CPC -seeking condonation
of delay in filing an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC (in
short “the condonation application”) and the other under Order
IX Rule 13 CPC seeking setting aside of ex-parte decree dated
July 9, 2014 passed in favour of the respondent in CS(OS)
431/2010 in short ‘the setting aside application’.
2. The relevant facts are that the respondent filed a suit for recovery
against the first appellant, a partnership firm (hereafter “the
FAO(OS) 291/2017 Page 1 of 15
firm”), arising out of their commercial transactions. Summons of
the suit were sent to the firm at three addresses i.e. B-35, Indira
Enclave, Neb Sarai, New Delhi; I-93, Lajpat Nagar, Part II, 2nd
Floor, Bikanerwala, New Delhi; and, I-21, 1st Floor, Part III,
Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, through ordinary process as also Regd.
AD process. Later, the second and third appellants (hereafter
“the partners”) were sought to be impleaded as defendants, and
being residents of I-93, Lajpat Nagar, Part II, 2nd Floor,
Bikanerwala, New Delhi and I-21, 1st Floor, Part III, Lajpat
Nagar, New Delhi (where the firm too was sought to be served
with the summons of the suit earlier). Notice of such application
as also the summons of the suit were thus ordered to be served on
them as well. Notices so issued to the partners through ordinary
process were received back with the reports of refusal. Then,
fresh summons of the suit were ordered to be issued for them.
Summons so issued to the partners through ordinary process, as
per the process server’s report, were attempted to be served at the
given addresses on 13.04.2012 and 20/23.04.2012. In terms of
the process server’s report, the partners could not be found at the
addressees and a lady, who represented herself to be the wife of
the third appellant, refused to accept the summons.
Source: Indian Kanoon