UKHC010114372026 2026:UHC:6161 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2013/2026 Chameli Devi --Petitioner Versus Ratan Singh & others --Respondents Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Pankaj Semwal, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Petitioner filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed, which was decided by learned Trial Court ex-parte on 19.12.2016. Defendant to the suit filed application for setting aside the ex-parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC with an application seeking condonation of delay. Learned Trial Court condoned the delay and allowed the delay condonation application, vide order dated 21.07.2025. Petitioner filed civil revision against that order, which was dismissed by learned III Additional District Judge, Haridwar, vide judgment and order dated 30.04.2026. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court. 3. Law is well settled that courts are meant to do justice. It is equally well settled that rules of procedure are handmaid of justice, which are intended to advance the cause of justice and not to thwart it. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & another v. Mst. Katiji & others, AIR 1987 SC 1353 and State of Haryana v. Chandra Mani & others, AIR 1996 SC 1623 has held that while considering prayer for delay condonation, liberal and UKHC010114372026 2026:UHC:6161 justice oriented approach should be adopted. 4. Since the case of the defendant was that notice issued by Trial Court was not served upon him and as and when she acquired knowledge about the ex parte decree, she thereafter immediately moved application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. Learned Trial Court, therefore, was justified in allowing the delay condonation application. Reason assigned by the Trial Court are valid, which call for no interference, therefore, the judgment rendered by Appellate Court also cannot be interfered with. 5. Thus, there is no scope for interference in the matter. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 21.07.2026 Navin NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df006da82a131bb4e440 3d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA875643AF56D653D095C 6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2026.07.22 18:37:58 +05'30'