https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469953 A restoration application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC that is filed after the decree date but promptly after knowledge of an ex parte decree need not fail merely because no separate Section 5 Limitation Act application was filed, where the delay is sufficiently explained within the application itself. The Court emphasised that procedure should serve justice and that a bona fide litigant should not suffer for counsel's lapse. It also disapproved revisional and High Court interference with the trial court's order setting aside the ex parte decree, holding that technical limitation objections should not defeat adjudication on merits. The trial court's restoration order was accordingly revived. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2026 16:23:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469953 A restoration application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC that is filed after the decree date but promptly after knowledge of an ex parte decree need not fail merely because no separate Section 5 Limitation Act application was filed, where the delay is sufficiently explained within the application itself. The Court emphasised that procedure should serve justice and that a bona fide litigant should not suffer for counsel's lapse. It also disapproved revisional and High Court interference with the trial court's order setting aside the ex parte decree, holding that technical limitation objections should not defeat adjudication on merits. The trial court's restoration order was accordingly revived. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469953