Girish Mittal vs Prateek Madhan

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Girish Mittal – Appellant
Versus
Prateek Madhan – Respondent

Table of Content
1. recall of ex-parte order. (Para 1 , 2 , 10)
2. grounds for recall of the order. (Para 3 , 6 , 7)
3. evidence of residence at chhatarpur property. (Para 4 , 5)
4. summary suit context. (Para 19 , 20)
5. interpretation of 'sufficient cause'. (Para 27 , 28 , 29)
6. final order allowing the application. (Para 34 , 35)

JUDGMENT

(VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)

I.A. 7268/2020 (Under Order IX Rule 7 read with Order XXXVII Rule 2(3) read with Rule 3(7) and Section 151 CPC by the Defendants)

1. The present application has been filed under Order IX Rule 7 read with Order XXXVII Rule 2(3) read with Rule 3(7) and Section 151 CPC seeking recall of the order dated 31.07.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the `impugned order') whereby the defendants were proceeded ex-parte.

2. The defendants have sought recall of the impugned order primarily on the ground that the defendants were never served with the summons in the suit for the reason that at the relevant time, the defendants were not staying at the address mentioned in the memo of parties.

3. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the present application has been filed within limitation.

4. It is claimed that although the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTMANOJ KUMAR OHRIGirish Mittal – AppellantVersusPrateek Madhan – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Girish Mittal – Appellant
Versus
Prateek Madhan – Respondent