Delhi High Court · 2026-01-22
GENIUS ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. vs SERVOTECH POWER SYSTEM PVT. LTD. D
- Citation / case number
- RFA(COMM)-306/2025 2026:DHC:622-DB
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Petitioner
- GENIUS ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.
- Respondent
- SERVOTECH POWER SYSTEM PVT. LTD. D
Judgment text excerpt
$~144 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 22.01.2026 + RFA(COMM) 306/2025, CM APPL. 31015/2025, CM APPL. 31016/2025 GENIUS ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. .....APPELLANT Through: Mr. Suresh Chand Singhal, Adv. versus SERVOTECH POWER SYSTEM PVT. LTD. D .....RESPONDENT Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J. (ORAL) RFA (COMM) 306/2025 and CM APPL. 31016/2025 1. This is an application filed on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff seeking condonation of the delay of approximately 914 days in filing the present appeal for impugning the judgment/order dated 08.09.2022. 2. The present appeal filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Court, 1908 (‘CPC’) read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (‘Act of 2015’) itself is directed against the judgment/order dated Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed RFA(COMM) 306/2025 Page 1 of 8 By:MAHIMA SHARMA Signing Date:29.01.2026 16:12:49 08.09.2022 passed by the Court of District Judge (Comm)-01, North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi in CS (COMM) No. 295 of 2022, whereby the plaint instituted by the appellant was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(c) of the CPC on the ground of non-payment of court fees despite multiple opportunities (‘impugned order I’). 2.1. Upon becoming aware of the rejection of the plaint through inspection of the order sheets, the appellant filed an application under Order IX Rule 4 read with Sections 47 and 151 CPC, along with an application for condonation of delay, seeking recall of the order dated 08.09.2022. The said applications were dismissed by an order dated 07.04.2025, passed in Misc. DJ No. 345/2025. (‘impugned order II’) Brief facts 3. The appellant is stated to be