Order 11

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: CS SCJ 703/23
CANARA BANK Vs. DEVENDER SHARMA
11.09.2025
Present: Sh. Pratap Chandra Rana, Ld. counsel for plaintiff.
None for defendant.
Notice issued against LR of the defendant of the
application U/O 22 Rule 4 CPC and application U/S 5 of
Limitation Act filed by the plaintiff received back with the report
of ‘Refusal’.
Ld. counsel for the plaintiff submits that Ld. LAC
appearing for the defendant has informed the court on 07.09.2024
that defendant has expired. The report on the summons issued
against the defendant also came with the report that he has
expired.
When the plaintiff received the aforesaid
information, the representative of the plaintiff went to the address
of the defendant to find out details of the LRs of the defendant.
However, despite all the efforts, no details could be found out till
04.12.2024. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed the aforesaid
application U/O 22 Rule 4 CPC on 05.12.2024. Ld. counsel for
the plaintiff submits that the application U/O 22 Rule 4 CPC
merely being a technical formality to implead the LRs of the
defendant on record, may be allowed.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the
delay of 58 days in filing the aforesaid application is hereby
condoned.
Perusal of the aforesaid application U/O 22 Rule 4
CPC shows that plaintiff has failed to mention any ground as to
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
why the present suit be continued against the LRs of the
defendant.
Ld. counsel for the plaintiff seeks some time to file
the amended application for impleadment of LRs of the
defendant.
Put up on 30.10.2025.
(SUNIL KHATRI)
Civil Judge-06 (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts
Delhi/11.09.2025
-- 2 of 2 --