Code of Civil Procedure, 1908–Order 9, Rule 13–Limitation Act, 1963–Sec. 5–Trial Court refused the condone the delay and also dismissed the application under Order 9, Rule 13–Defendants filed the revision petition against the order of refusing to condone the delay–No revision was filed against the consequential order of dismissal of application under Order 9, Rule 13–In the revision, High Court not only condoned the delay but also set aside the ex-parte decree–Whether proper ?–Held, no–High Court rightly condoned the delay considering the facts of the case, but the matter was required to be remitted back to the Trial Court to decide the application under Order 9, Rule 13–High Court proceeded to automatically restore the suit and directed the Trial Court to dispose the suit expeditiously, which is not sustainable–Directed accordingly.
