1 SB Civil Writ Petition No.1590/2009 Sukhdev. vs. Vijay Chand Surana. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1590/2009 Sukhdev. vs. Vijay Chand Surana. Date : 23.3.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.HS Srimali, for the petitioner. Mr.Arun Bhansali, for the respondent. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner, who was defendant in the suit for eviction, faced an ex-parte decree on 13.4.2005. He submitted an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC in the trial court on 11.7.2005 which was rejected by the trial court on 7.8.2006. Then the petitioner preferred writ petition before this High Court on 26.4.2007, though the order was appealable. This Court passed a detailed order on 7.8.2007, yet the petitioner did not choose to withdraw the writ petition and ultimately, that writ petition was withdrawn on 18.1.2008 with liberty to file appeal before the appellate court. Then the petitioner preferred first appeal before 2 SB Civil Writ Petition No.1590/2009 Sukhdev. vs. Vijay Chand Surana. the appellate court on 7.2.2008. This Court while rejecting the petitioner's writ petition granted liberty to the petitioner to file the appeal as the order was appealable. Though there cannot be question of bonafides in challenging the order of the trial court passed on application filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC by way of writ petition, yet even if the period consumed in prosecuting the matter in the Court of law is taken into account under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, even then as per the trial court, the petitioner failed to explain the delay of eight months in filing the appeal and that was the period from 7.8.2006 to 26.4.2007, which was the period in which, no proceedings were pending in the court of law to challenge the impugned order. The trial court rightly held that the petitioner can be given benefit at the most of the period which was consumed by him in prosecuting the matter in the court bonafide and that period is only from the date of filing of the writ petition to the date of withdrawal of the writ 3 SB Civil Writ Petition No.1590/2009 Sukhdev. vs. Vijay Chand Surana. petition and if that period is credited, then also, the petitioner's appeal is barred by time hopelessly. In view of the above reasons, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Consequently, this writ petition, having no merits, is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya