High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/1465/2026

M/S Mahabir Flex (Actually M/S Mahavir Steel Through Sole Proprietor Sh. Anil Jain) v. Shri Ramesh And ORS

2026-02-03Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta3 pages

$~75 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1465/2026 M/S MAHABIR FLEX (ACTUALLY M/S MAHAVIR STEEL THROUGH SOLE PROPRIETOR SH. ANIL JAIN).....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Shri Harsh, Adv.

versus SHRI RAMESH AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA % 03.02.2026

O R D E R

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing an order dated 31.05.2023 and order dated 22.08.2023, passed by the concerned authority under the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954. 2.

The background of the matter is that there was a dispute between the petitioner and its employees (the respondents herein) with regard to payment of dues. Consequently, the respondents initiated legal proceedings against the petitioner on 18.01.2021 before the concerned authority under the Delhi Shops and Establishments Act, 1954, North West at Ashok Vihar, Delhi. 3.

Initially, the petitioner was represented through counsel. However, while the proceedings were ongoing, the concerned advocate for the petitioner stopped appearing. As a result, the petitioner was proceeded ex parte on 01.04.2022.

The concerned authority completed the proceedings and taking into account the attendant facts and circumstances, passed an order dated 31.05.2023. The same inter-alia reads as under: The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Thereafter, an application under Order 9 Rule XIII read with Section 151 CPC came to be filed by the petitioner seeking the aforesaid order dated 31.05.2023 to be set aside. The said application also came to be dismissed vide order dated 22.08.2023, holding as under: "In the present matter the summon dated 23.09.2021 sent to respondent was duly received by the respondent as per track consignment delivery report No.ED7853943671N of Postal Department. As it was within the knowledge of the respondent that the matter has been fixed before the Authority on 08.tt.202L, for which the respondent failed to file written statement having knowledge of the date of hearing. In view of the above I am of the considered view that the respondent had notice of the date of hearing and had sufficient time to appear to answer the claim of the claimant. The respondent had knowledge of the date of hearing and deliberately failed to file written statement. Hence in the light of above The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

said judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, the said application of the respondent is not maintainable, hence dismissed." 6.

The present petition has been filed almost 2 1⁄2 years after the aforesaid order dated 22.08.2023 came to be passed. 7.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to justify the laches in filing the present petition. The same itself is sufficient to dismiss the present petition.

Even otherwise, this Court finds no infirmity in the directions contained in the order dated 31.05.2023. As evident from paragraph-5 of the order dated 31.05.2023, substantial evidence was placed on record by the claimants, which is taken note of in the said order. 9.

In the circumstances, this Court finds no merit in the present petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

SACHIN DATTA, J FEBRUARY 3, 2026/cl The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.