Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 7 CS (Comm)/508/2026 Naresh Kumar Sabharwal Vs Raju
Kumar
22.08.2026
Present: Ld. Counsel for plaintiff.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant via VC.
Some efforts for settlement have made but no
settlement is likely at this stage.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant has submitted during
the course of interaction that the defendant was not
getting many students in the library which he had
opened in the tenanted premises and now it has been
sealed. It is stated by the plaintiff that the library
was sealed only about two weeks and prior to that
the defendant was running his business.
Application of defendant under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC
is fixed for arguments today. It is mentioned in the
application that none had appeared before the court
on behalf of the defendant on 01.07.2026 when ex-
parte order was passed because VC of the court was
not working and defendant’s counsel could not
appear physically, being out of city.
Further, the defendant was occupied in medical
treatment of his father who is suffering from
prostate cancer. Despite having this ground of
serious illness of his father, no document has been
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
placed on record along with application to justify the
ground. Therefore, I find it difficult to believe the
same. However, considering that procedure is
handmaid of justice and sufficient opportunity
should be given to the defendant to present his case
on merits; ex-parte proceedings are set aside subject
to costs of Rs.12,000/- to be paid in the following
fund:-
“Armed Forces Battle Causalities Welfare Fund
Bank Name: Canara Bank Ltd.
Account No. 90552010165915
IFSC Code: CNRB0019055”
Accordingly, application under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC
is disposed of and the defendant is restored to his
original position in the matter.
WS has been filed on 30.07.2026. Since the service
of the defendant was complete on 20.05.2026, WS is
delayed by 40 days. Arguments heard on the
application for condonation of delay in filing of WS.
In the application also, same ground is taken
regarding non-appearance of Ld. Counsel and
medical treatment of father of the defendant. Since
no document has been filed on record, it cannot be
said that the ground is correct. Moreover, every
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
day’s delay has to be explained which is not done.
However, I am inclined to take the WS on record.
Ordered accordingly. Inconvenience caused to the
plaintiff is compensated by ordering the costs of
Rs.20,000/- to be payable to the plaintiff by the
defendant. This costs is payable to the plaintiff
because delay has effected the interests of the
plaintiff in the present case and also because he has
paid fees around Rs.15,000/- to LC, who recorded
the evidence.
Accordingly, the application for condonation of
delay in filing WS is allowed subject to payment of
above costs.
It is noted that defendant has not filed affidavit of
admission/denial of documents along with WS.
Plaintiff seeks some time to file replication. Two
weeks time is granted to him for doing needful with
advance copy to other side. Online and physical
filing be done simultaneously
Put up for proof of payment of costs as well as
framing of issues on 22.09.2026.
(DR. SAVITRI)
District Judge (Commercial Court)-08
Central, Tis Hazari Courts,
Extension Block, Delhi
Date: 22.08.2026/s
-- 3 of 3 --