1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 09.09.2014, passed by the trial court, on an application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the CPC). The said application was accompanied by an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (in short the Limitation Act). The trial court dismissed the appellant’s application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC on the ground of inordinate delay of 607 days and, broadly, for the reason that it did not believe the stand taken in the application that the appellant had engaged a counsel in the matter, who had been tasked with the duty to defend his case.

2. Briefly, the aforementioned applications thus, came to be filed by the appellant/ defendant in the background of the following facts:

2.1 The respondent/ plaintiff herein had filed a suit for recovery for a sum of Rs. 5 lacs which was provided to the appellant herein, who was arrayed as defendant no.1 in the suit. The appellant/ defendant no.1 is a partner in a firm by the name of M/s Advance Surface Technology. The said entity was impleaded as defendant no.2 in the suit.

2.2 The respondent/ plaintiff had advanced the said financial