The sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay or restoration of the proceeding is crucial, and the court must encourage litigation to be decided on merit rather than dismissed on technical grounds.

1. A preliminary point is taken that the application has been wrongly filed under the provisions of Order IX Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but ought to have been filed under Order IX Rule 8 of the Code, which provides that the Court must record the reasons for restoring the suit.

2. Admittedly a proceeding under Section 17 of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 was taken out by the landlord/opposite party for fixation of fair rent. The petitioner is a tenant and naturally is aggrieved by every action of the landlord, which has a resultant effect in increasing the monthly rent.

3. Unfortunately the application was dismissed, as the landlord/opposite party could not take steps on the said fateful day. An application is taken out for restoration of the said proceeding. The Rent Controller has found the explanations to be sufficient and allowed the said application for restoration ex debito justitiae.

4. It is ardently submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that there is a variance in the findings as well as the ultimate decision taken by the Rent Controller in the impugned order.

5. It is no longer res integra that the Court should encourage the proceeding to be decided on merit than to be nipped on a technical ground. If a proceeding was dismissed for default for the laches and lapses of the learned advocate representing the landlord, the party should not suffer.

6. The learned advocate for the petitioner is very much vocal in his submission that the Court must record its satisfaction on sufficient cause, which is one of the paramount ingredients for condonation of delay or for restoration of the proceeding, which was dismissed for default. The sufficient cause cannot be squeezed within the straitjacket formula, it varies from case to case and depends upon the circumstances and events pleaded in the application.

7. If the Court finds from the materials before it that sufficient cause has been made out; it can proceed to condone the delay or to restore the proceeding, which was dismissed for default. If the Court, in this case the Rent Controller, allowed the said application, it implies that he found the cause to be sufficient though may not have expressed in elucidate or elaborate manner.

8. I had an occasion to peruse the application for condonation of delay appearing at page 23 of the revisional application. This Court finds that because of the lapses and laches on the part of the learned advocate or his clerk the matter was dismissed and the delay occurred in applying the application for restoration. It appears that similar grounds have been taken both in an application for condonation of delay as well as in an application for restoration.

9. The learned advocate for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of this Court in case of A.B.B.Marine Products Private Limited vs. Indian Bank reported in 1999 (2) CHN 156 in support of the contention that the opposite party, being the Private Limited Company, should not be permitted to take shelter under the laches and lapses of the learned advocate representing it as a ground for condonation of delay or for restoration of a proceeding.

10. My attention is drawn to the observations made in paragraph 18 of the said judgment, wherein the order dismissing the matter for default is quoted. The learned Judge did not find such explanations to be sufficient enough for the purpose of restoration of the proceeding. In paragraph 20 of the said Report, the learned Judge held that since a political party has called Bandh on a particular date, which cannot be a sufficient ground either for non-attendance of the learned advocates or the Court staff. Interestingly the Court though refused to restore the proceeding, yet permitted the applicant therein to institute a fresh suit subject to the period of limitation.

11. This Court does not find that the case involved in the above noted Report can be put on equal pedestal with the given case and to apply the proposition of law