Condonation of delay fails where affidavit evidence lacks personal knowledge and does not prove the alleged partner dispute.

A delay in filing a rebate claim was not condoned where the only support was an affidavit from a partner who lacked shown personal knowledge of the relevant events. The alleged inter se dispute between partners and the claimed withholding of the rebate file were not satisfactorily proved, so the affidavit had no probative value. On that basis, the material was found insufficient to justify exercise of discretion in favour of condonation, and the rebate claim remained rejected on limitation grounds.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the rebate claim could be condoned on the basis of the explanation that a dispute between partners prevented timely filing.

Analysis: The explanation for the delay was supported only by an affidavit from a partner who was not shown to have personal knowledge of the relevant events at the material time. The affidavit did not satisfactorily establish how the deponent could speak to the alleged inter se dispute or to the alleged holding back of the rebate file. The evidence was found to be of no probative value and insufficient to constitute a basis for exercising discretion in condonation of delay.

Conclusion: The delay was not condoned and the rejection of the rebate claim on that ground stood.

---