https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294135 Where an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was filed after 431 days, the delay was held condonable because the explanation was bona fide: counsel had retired without informing the defendant, and the defendant claimed no knowledge of the ex parte proceedings. The court treated absence of mala fides and the need to avoid prejudice to the plaintiff as supporting condonation, and preferred substantial justice over a technical objection. The delay condonation and setting-aside dismissal were therefore found unjustified, the delay was condoned, the ex parte proceedings were set aside, and the matter was remanded for decision on merits on payment of costs. en-us Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Mar 2021 11:20:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294135 Where an application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC was filed after 431 days, the delay was held condonable because the explanation was bona fide: counsel had retired without informing the defendant, and the defendant claimed no knowledge of the ex parte proceedings. The court treated absence of mala fides and the need to avoid prejudice to the plaintiff as supporting condonation, and preferred substantial justice over a technical objection. The delay condonation and setting-aside dismissal were therefore found unjustified, the delay was condoned, the ex parte proceedings were set aside, and the matter was remanded for decision on merits on payment of costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294135