The appellant, Ravi Goyal, challenged an order dated August 1, 2018, and simultaneously filed a petition seeking condonation of delay. The appellant contended that the impugned order was passed ex-parte, and they were unaware of it until they received a certified copy on September 18, 2018 . Subsequently, the appeal was filed on September 24, 2018 , which, according to the appellant, meant there was no delay in filing. The respondent, Butterfly Appliances, through its counsel, argued that the appellant had prior knowledge of the matter's pendency. However, the record did not contain any evidence to suggest that the Adjudicating Authority had issued a notice to the appellant regarding the proceedings. This lack of documented notice was a crucial point in determining the

The appellant, Ravi Goyal, challenged an order dated August 1, 2018, and simultaneously filed a petition seeking condonation of delay. The appellant contended that the impugned order was passed ex-parte, and they were unaware of it until they received a certified copy on September 18, 2018 . Subsequently, the appeal was filed on September 24, 2018 , which, according to the appellant, meant there was no delay in filing. The respondent, Butterfly Appliances, through its counsel, argued that the appellant had prior knowledge of the matter's pendency. However, the record did not contain any evidence to suggest that the Adjudicating Authority had issued a notice to the appellant regarding the proceedings. This lack of documented notice was a crucial point in determining the