FAO No.396/2009 Page 1 UNREPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO No. 396/2009 Date of Decision: April 30, 2010 LAL CHAND SHYAM ………..……………… Appellant through Mr.Manish Makhija, Advocate versus SUSHIL MOHAN BHARDWAJ AND ANR. ..... Respondents through Mr. Arvind Dhingra, Advocate CORAM:. HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the ‘Digest’? No REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been preferred against the order of Additional District Judge Shri Kamlesh Kumar whereby the application of the appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for setting aside of the ex-parte decree dated July 26, 2008 has been dismissed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is a resident of Shimla and that he had not received summons of the suit. On the other hand, it is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that not only did the appellant not appear before the Additional District Judge, but he has also not been FAO No.396/2009 Page 1 appearing in criminal proceedings initiated against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Having regard to the fact that the decree passed against the appellant is to the tune of Rs. 10,76,000/- along with interest @ 24% per annum which is a huge amount, this court is of the view that the appellant should be given an opportunity to contest the suit on merits. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, subject to the appellant depositing Rs. 5 lacs towards the decretal amount with the trial court within four weeks from now and subject to the appellant appearing before the concerned court of the Metropolitan Magistrate where proceedings under Section 138 of the Code of Civil Procedure are pending against him. The learned counsel for the respondent shall furnish to the counsel for the appellant the particulars of the court where the cases under Section 138 are pending and also the dates on which they are listed. Both the parties are directed to appear before the trial court on May 10, 2010. The impugned order is set aside, subject to the appellant paying cost of Rs.50,000/- to the respondents within four weeks from now. The appeal is allowed, subject to the above conditions. REKHA SHARMA, J. APRIL 30, 2010 PC