( 1 ) THIS is an application filed by the defendant for condo- nation of delay in filing its leave to Defend . The relevant facts are that summons for Judgment were attempted to be served on the defendants on 5. 3. 1999 at its Delhi office; the service report records a refusal. The defendant in its memorandum of Appearance for service had given three addresses viz. (i) the Delhi office, (ii) Registered Office at Pune, and (iii) address of the Counsel for the defendant- company. It appears that the Process Server went to the Delhi office and tried to serve the summons for judgment on Ms. Shakila who informed him that she only dealt with -maintenance of record in the Personnel Department and was not authorised to accept summons. It is the defendant/applicant s contention as contained in para 7 of the application that the Process Server did not leave any copy of the summons for judgment with Ms. Shakila and also did not affix these documents at the said address. It is further alleged that the Process Server did not make any attempt to serve the process again even though he was specifically told that the authorise person, Mr. S. M. Khanna, would return to Delhi on