In Arjun Lal @ Prahlad & Ors. v. Rameshwar Prasad & Ors. (2025), the Rajasthan High Court reaffirmed that the rule of limitation is meant to fix the lifespan of a legal remedy, not to extinguish substantive rights. The petitioners’ delay of about 37 days in filing an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC to set aside an ex-parte decree was condoned by the Assistant Collector. However, the Board of Revenue reversed it on the technical ground that the condonation plea under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was filed later. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand quashed the Board’s order, holding that procedural lapses can be cured and courts must prioritize substantial justice over technicalities. The Court observed that genuine reasons like illness warranted a liberal approach in condonation. It restored the Assistant Collector’s order and directed speedy disposal of the suit, emphasizing that justice must prevail over formality.