A. K. Chawla, J. - (1.) The appellants challenge the order dated 10.10.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge, which rejected two applications filed by the appellants, one under Section 151 CPC -seeking condonation of delay in filing an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC (in short "the condonation application") and the other under Order IX Rule 13 CPC seeking setting aside of ex-parte decree dated July 9, 2014 passed in favour of the respondent in CS(OS) 431/2010 in short 'the setting aside application'.
(2.) The relevant facts are that the respondent filed a suit for recovery against the first appellant, a partnership firm (hereafter "the firm"), arising out of their commercial transactions. Summons of the suit were sent to the firm at three addresses i.e. B-35, Indira Enclave, Neb Sarai, New Delhi; I-93, Lajpat Nagar, Part II, 2nd Floor, Bikanerwala, New Delhi; and, I-21, 1st Floor, Part III, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi, through ordinary process as also Regd. AD process. Later, the second and third appellants (hereafter "the partners") were sought to be impleaded as defendants, and being residents of I-93, Lajpat Nagar, Part II, 2nd Floor, Bikanerwala, New Delhi and I-21, 1st Floor, Part III, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi (where the firm too was sought to be served with the summons of the suit earlier). Notice of such application as also the summons of the suit were thus ordered to be served on them as well. Notices so issued to the partners through ordinary process were received back with the reports of refusal. Then, fresh summons of the suit were ordered to be issued for them. Summons so issued to the partners through ordinary process, as per the process server's report, were attempted to be served at the given addresses on 13.04.2012 and 20/23.04.2012. In terms of the process server's report, the partners could not be found at the addressees and a lady, who represented herself to be the wife of the third appellant, refused to accept the summons.
(3.) In this background, the Registrar proceeded to order service of the partners by way of affixation and recording service on the appellant no.1 being complete as on 06.09.2011. Affixation, as per the report of the process server was affected on 07.08.2012. The appellants were unrepresented and were proceeded ex-parte and a decree followed. During execution proceedings, the appellants filed the condonation application and the setting aside application. The condonation application stated that the appellants came to know of the suit and the execution proceedings only on 20.01.2015. On this, according to them, they engaged an Advocate, who filed his Vakalatnama on 03.02.2015 and conducted inspection of the court file on 04.02.2015 and thereafter, applied for certified copies of the plaint, documents and the annexures on 05.02.2015 and ultimately, in pursuance of the directions of the court, having been supplied with the certified copy of the plaint only, made the condonation application along with the setting aside application on 30.04.2015. Thereby, the appellants sought delay of 65 days in preferring the setting aside application being condoned.;