Recall of ex parte orders permitted where good and sufficient cause, counsel engaged and absence of negligence; application restored.

An ex parte order may be set aside when the applicant demonstrates good and sufficient cause for non-appearance, specifically where counsel was engaged and the failure to appear was not due to the applicant's negligence; applying that principle the court recalled the ex parte order of 03-04-2002 and restored the company application to its original number with no order as to costs. The decision treats engagement of counsel and absence of negligence as operative grounds to restore proceedings and permit adjudication on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the ex parte order dated 03-04-2002 in S.B. Company Application No.12/1998 should be set aside and the application restored in view of the Maharashtra State Electricity Board's showing of cause for non-appearance.

Analysis: The Court examined documentary correspondence (Annexures A-2 to A-5) demonstrating that the Maharashtra State Electricity Board had engaged counsel and had repeatedly sought information regarding the stage of proceedings, and that the counsel failed to appear for reasons not attributable to negligence on the part of the Board. The application was brought under Section 456 and Section 468 of the Companies Act, 1956, Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules and Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Court applied the principle that an ex parte order may be set aside where the party seeking recall shows good and sufficient cause for non-appearance and where the party was not negligent in contesting the matter.

Conclusion: The application to set aside the ex parte order dated 03-04-2002 is allowed; the order dated 03-04-2002 is recalled and S.B. Company Application No.12/1998 is restored to its original number. There shall be no order as to costs.

Ratio Decidendi: An ex parte order will be recalled and the matter restored when the applicant demonstrates good and sufficient cause for non-appearance, including engagement of counsel and absence of negligence, such that the party was prevented from contesting the matter on merits.

---