POORAN KUMAR vs M/S. PRIDE HOTELS LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 1st, September, 2025 + FAO 242/2025 & CM APPL. 54970-54971/2025 POORAN KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. D.K. Singh, Advocate along with appellant in person. versus M/S. PRIDE HOTELS LTD .....Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Appellant had filed a suit seeking recovery. 2. The suit was filed before this Court on its Original Side but with the change in pecuniary jurisdiction, it got transferred to District Courts. 3. When the abovesaid suit was taken up by the learned District Courts on 01.09.2019, it was dismissed for non-prosecution for the reason that there was no appearance from the side of the plaintiff. 4. After, virtually, five years, an application under Order IX Rule 9 CPC was filed by the plaintiff seeking restoration of his suit. 5. According to him, on account of untimely death of his father on 12.08.2019 (prior to the date of dismissal of the suit), he suffered mental agony and could not follow up the matter for some months. He also mentioned, in his application, that he was under the impression that his counsel would take care of the suit and, therefore, he never bothered to check Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed FAO 242/2025 1 By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Date:03.09.2025 17:16:48 the dates on regular basis as he was fully dependent upon his counsel, who always assured him that he was acting in his best interest. According to him, when he contacted his counsel in March, 2020, he was apprised that his case had been adjourned sine die and would only be taken up once the pandemic of Covid-19 was over. 6. According to him, some of the similarly situated claimants had gone to National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) seeking relief against