IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMPMO No.233 of 2022 Decided on 03rd September, 2025 NTPC Limited …Petitioner Versus Shakuntla and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Pranjal Munjal, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. R.K. Bansal, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.4. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order 10.05.2022 passed by learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P., in an application filed under Section 146 of the Civil Procedure Code on the ground that impugned order has been passed by the learned Court below by ignoring that an application for recalling order dated 07.11.2019, in terms whereof, the present petitioner was proceeded against ex parte was pending adjudication before 2 the said Court, which probably by omission was not brought to the notice of the learned Court as a result whereof, the same remained undecided. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the documents appended with the present petition. He referred to the application filed under Order 9 Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code which is appended with the petition as Annexure P-3. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that this application was filed for recalling order dated 07.11.2019, in terms whereof, NTPC was proceeded against ex parte. The application was filed on 27.04.2022. Yet, the impugned order was passed without passing any order on the said application. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if this Court is inclined to allow the petition, then, learned Court below be directed to decide the application in an expeditious manner. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents, as it is a matter of record that the application filed by the present petitioner for recalling the order, in terms whereof, said petitioner was 3 proceeded against ex parte remained undecided, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order is not sustainable. 4. Accordingly, without any further observation, this petition is allowed. Order dated 10.05.2022 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Court below with the direction that let the application filed under Section 146 of the Civil Procedure Code be decided, but after deciding the application filed by the present petitioner praying for setting aside of the ex parte order. Parties through counsel to appear before learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P., on 22.09.2025. Learned District Judge, Mandi, H.P., to make an endeavour to decide the applications on or before 30.11.2025. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 03, 2025 (Vinod)