PANKAJ CHETAN vs ANUJ CHETAN

Judgment text excerpt

$~37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 15.04.2025 + C.R.P. 377/2023 PANKAJ CHETAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Akshat Gupta, Advocate. versus ANUJ CHETAN .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate with Respondent in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral) 1. The present Petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/Defendant under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [hereinafter referred to as “CPC”] against two orders dated 04.12.2021 and 26.10.2023 passed by learned Additional District Judge-01, South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi. 2. By the Order dated 04.12.2021, the right to file written statement of the Respondent/Plaintiff was closed since no one appeared on his behalf despite service of summons on 06.12.2020 and the matter was put up for ex parte evidence on 14.03.2022. 2.1 Subsequently, by the Order dated 26.10.2023, an Application under Order IX Rule 7 of the CPC filed by the Petitioner/Defendant to set aside order dated 14.12.2021 [hereinafter referred to as “Application under Order IX Rule 7 of the CPC”] was dismissed. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:28.04.2025 C.R.P. 377/2023 Page 1 of 12 18:22:16 3. A Coordinate Bench of this Court had, by an order dated 14.12.2023, kept the proceedings before the learned Trial Court in abeyance. 4. Learned Counsel for Petitioner/Defendant has made the following submissions. It is submitted that the Petitioner/Defendant and the Respondent/Plaintiff are real brothers. In view of the disputes between them, the Respondent/Plaintiff filed a suit for recovery, permanent and mandatory injunctions in the sum of Rs.66,72,071/- along with interest against the Petitioner/Defendant. 5. The suit was