Today is fixed for hearing of this M.A. case which has been instituted by op for setting aside the ex parte order which has been passed by this Commission in this case vide order no. 35 dt. 6.12.2023.

One v.nama has been filed which is found defective and so it is not accepted.

The applicant of this M.A. case has filed one show cause and another application for setting aside the ex parte order. Copy served. Let it be kept with the record.

It appears that the as order of ex parte hearing of this case has been passed by this District Commission on 6.12.2023 but the op appeared in the C.C. case no. 68 of 2019 (wherefrom this M.A. case has been cropped up) filed the application for setting aside the ex parte order on 19.1.2024. This matter has been contested by the op

Heard both sides. Considered submission.

Perused the applications which have been filed by the applicant (op of the C.C. case no. 68 of 2019).

It appears from the case record that the M.A. application for setting aside the ex parte order has been filed after one month but not prayer for condonation of delay in the matter of filing W/V and M.A. application has been filed. In the absence of any prayer for condonation of delay the prayer of the op who is the applicant of M.A. case for setting aside ex parte order cannot be allowed.

Moreover, it is the observation of the Hon’ble Apex Court that no W/V can be accepted after the completion of the statutory period of time and in this regard the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Hilli Multipurpose Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. is very important.

Considering the above noted factors the prayer for setting aside ex parte order against the op is rejected.

In the light of the observation made above the M.A. case is disposed of.