JUDGMENT :

K.M. Mehta, J.

M/s. Pravin Ratilal Share & Stock Brokers Ltd., the appellant (orig. defendant) has filed this appeal on 7.10.2006 against the judgment and order dated 10th March 2005 passed by the learned Chamber Judge, Court No.14, in Summary Suit No. 655 of 2004 below Exh.9. By the impugned judgment, the learned Judge has decreed the suit and directed that the defendant shall pay the decretal amount in sum ofRs.6,43,028/- with interest @ 12% p.a. From the date of the suit until its actual payment.

2. As there was a delay of 546 days in filing the appeal and therefore, Civil Application No.12817 of 2006 has been filed on 9th Nov.2006 for condonation of delay, in this behalf. In the application for condonation of delay, the Division Bench of this Court issued Rule on 13th Nov.2006 and Mr. Jigar M. Patel, learned advocate waived the service of rule on behalf of the respondent.

3. As regards condonation of delay is concerned, on behalf of respondent, one Shri Bhanubhai S.Patel has filed affidavit-in-reply dated 20th Nov.2006, contesting the application for condonation of delay.

4. I have heard Ms. Dharmishta Raval, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr.D.C.Dave, learned advocate on behalf of respondent, who have made several submissions in this behalf. However, before I consider the application for condonation of delay, I would like to narrate relevant facts about the main appeal in this behalf.

5. Shri Bhanubhai S.Patel, respondent (original plaintiff) had filed Summary Suit No. 655 of 2004 on 27.2.2004 before the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, claiming Rs. 6,43,028/- from M/s. Pravin Ratilal Shares & Stock Brokers Ltd.- original defendant.

5.1 In the suit, the plaintiff has contended that the original defendant - M/s. Pravin Ratilal Shares & Brokers Ltd., is a Company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act with its Registered Office at Ahmedabad. It has been contended that the plaintiff used to purchase and sell shares of different Companies through the defendant on different dates. The plaintiff has also submitted that defendant has maintained plaintiff's Account No. B-122 in defendant's book of account and amount of shares sold by plaintiff has been credited to the said account. At the foot of the said account as on 31.3.2001 an amount of Rs. 4,78,836/- was found due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff.

5.2 It was contented that the plaintiff requested and demanded the aforesaid amount from the defendant, the the defendant failed and neglected to make the same to the plaintiff with interest @ 12% p.a.

5.3 Thereafter, the plaintiff addressed a notice to the defendant on 10.1.2004 through his Advocate and called upon the defendant to make payment of the outstanding amount of Rs. 4,74,836/- with accrued interest @ 12% from 4.7.2001 onwards. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant has neither replied to the said notice nor paid any amount.

5.4 In view of the same, the plaintiff filed the aforesaid Summary Suit under Order 37 Rule 2 of the CPC on 27.2.2004 praying for a decree forRs.4,74,836/- being the principal amount found due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff with interest @ 12% being Rs.1,66,191/- as unpaid outstanding amount and thus claimed total amount of Rs. 6,43,028/-.

5.5 After the suit was filed, the City Civil Court issued summons on 5.4.2004 to the defendant. It appears that the same was served upon the defendant and the defendant appeared before the City Civil Court through his Advocate.

5.6 However, it appears that the defendant had not filed any reply as contemplated under Order 37 of the Code, particularly Rule 1 and 2 as well as Rule 3. Rule 3 provides for the procedure for the appearance of defendant.

5.7 As the defendant failed and neglected to make the payment to the plaintiff, the plaintiff filed Summons for Judgment at Exh.9 on 16.4.2004. In the Summons for Judgment, it has been stated that in view of the aforesaid circumstances, the