the reason for the delay, the length of the delay, and the chances of success. On the reason for the delay, she argued that they were unaware either of the existence of the Commercial Case No. 62 of 2025 or of its default judgment dated 30 September 2025. They were neither served with the pleadings of the suit nor the notice of the date of default judgment. From the above, she stated that, under Order 20 Rule 4 of the CPC, the law requires that, even if the defendant does not appear at the hearing, he should be served with notice of judgment. To bolster her submission, she cited cases of Cosmas Construction Co.