Final Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 15 Misc SCJ 30/25 SANJAY SHUKLA Vs. M/S HOOXON
TRADING CORPORATION
The court is being conducted physically as well as virtually.
18.03.2026
Note: All Counsels appearing through VC are requested to ensure
that their video is on when their matter is taken up. Their
appearance will not be noted otherwise. They are also requested to
appear in proper court attire from an appropriate place having no
background noise.
Present: Applicant in person.
Sh. Anil Tejan, Ld. counsel for applicant ( through VC).
Sh. Ashish Sharma, Ld. counsel for respondent along
with respondent.
Matter is listed for consideration of application moved
under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, r/w Section 5 of Limitation Act.
It is stated by counsel for respondent that respondent
does not wish to file reply and he is ready to straightaway address
arguments.
Arguments heard.
It is averred by applicant that he was never served with
the summons of the suit and had no knowledge of the proceedings.
That, he came to know about the decree only on 10.01.2025, when he
appeared before another court and therefore, filed the present
application on 24.01.2025, along with an application seeking
condonation of delay.
Plaintiff has contested the application, stating that the
same is hopelessly time barred and devoid of merits. It is contended
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
that defendant had full knowledge of the decree and had even
participated in mediation proceedings on 30.01.2024, arising out of
execution proceedings in respect of the decree in question. A copy of
the said Mediation Settlement is also placed on record.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
A perusal of the mediation agreement clearly reveals
that the matter was referred to mediation in execution petition no.
275/23, which was filed for enforcement of the decree dated
26.05.2023 passed in the present suit. The settlement specifically
records that applicant appeared there in person. The settlement
expressly provides that it covered execution proceedings as well as
the connected case filed under Section 138 NI Act.
All the aforesaid material facts unequivocally establish
that defendant not only had the knowledge of the decree, but also had
actively participated in the proceedings arriving there from, like
execution and mediation. The applicability clause in the settlement
clearly demonstrates that the compromise extended to the present
case. In view thereof, the plea of the defendant that he acquired
knowledge of the decree only on 10.01.2025 is absolutely false and
misleading.
It is well settled that the period of limitation for filing
an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC is 30 days from the date
of decree or date of knowledge. In the present case, defendant had
knowledge atleast on 30.01.2024 when the execution matter was
settled in mediation. The present application filed on 24.01.2025 is
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
thus hopelessly barred by limitation. The delay of nearly one year
remained unexplained and unjustified. The present application
stands dismissed accordingly.
File be consigned to Record Room as per rules.
(SANA KHAN)
Civil Judge-05/Central/THC
18.03.2026
-- 3 of 3 --