$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010567002018 + FAO 421/2018, CM APPL. 36804/2018 and CM APPL. 36806/2018 ABRAR KHAN .....Appellant Through: Mr.U.K. Shandilya, Advocate versus M/S BENGAL SHOE MACHINERY PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 23.09.2026 1. The present appeal pertains to a challenge in the context of an order dated 23.11.2017 passed by the trial court, whereby the application filed by the present appellant under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC came to be dismissed. 2. The appeal has remained pending for appearance of the respondent who was duly served and represented, but stopped appearing thereafter. Accordingly, this Court has proceeded to hear the submissions. 3. A perusal of the proceedings indicates that even a default notice was issued on 18.12.2023 to the respondent and its counsel, however, none appeared. The notice to the respondent could not be served and as per the report of the process server, the company was not found at the given address. Accordingly, this Court has proceeded to hear the arguments from the appellant. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2026 at 12:07:48 4. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant was never served with the summons of the suit and the subject application was filed only when the summons were received in the execution. 5. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the application was dismissed for the reason that the same was filed after a delay and without there being accompanied by any application seeking condonation. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the trial court erred in recording so as there was only a delay of 22 days in preferring the subject application alongwith the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC. The appellant had also preferred a separate application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The appellant came to knowledge in the second week of December, 2016 and the subject application was filed on 08.02.2017, the application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC need not even be accompanied by a separate application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 7. In view of the above, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The suit is restored to its original position and is directed to be listed before the concerned Court on 05.10.2026. 8. In view of the above, the present appeal is disposed of alongwith the pending applications. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026 na This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/09/2026 at 12:07:48