Condonation of delayed restoration allowed where office objections were timely cured and Registry inaction prevented registration.

A delay of 2,386 days in seeking restoration was condoned where the appellant had removed office objections within time and the failure to number and register the appeal lay with the Registry, not the appellant. The court treated the delay as technical because compliance with the conditional order had already been completed, and a party cannot be required to perform an act dependent on the Registry once objections are cured. The notice of motion was therefore made absolute and the appeal restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay of 2,386 days in filing the notice of motion for restoration of the appeal should be condoned, and whether the appeal should be restored in view of the removal of office objections within time and the failure of the Registry to number and register the matter.

Analysis: The explanation for the delay was found sufficient. The office objections had been removed within the stipulated time, and the failure to number and register the appeal was treated as a matter within the Registry's control, not the appellant's control. A conditional order cannot require a party to do what depends upon the Registry once objections have been complied with. The delay was therefore treated as technical and deserving of condonation.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the notice of motion was made absolute, resulting in restoration of the appeal.

---