THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3444 OF 2009. DATED: 12-10-2009. Between: 1.Punnam Saraiah and another … Petitioners/Defendants and Ravula Ramesh …Respondent/Plaintiff THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.3444 OF 2009. ORDER: This revision by the petitioners-defendants is directed against the order, dated 23-06-2008, in I.A.No.448 of 2008, in O.S.No.70 of 2008, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District, whereunder whereby the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 55 days in filing the petition under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners-defendants contended that proper explanation was given for not filing the petition within the time and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-plaintiff contended that as the petitioner failed to explain the delay, the trial Court rightly dismissed the application and hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 4. The word ‘sufficient cause’ in Section 5 of the Limitation Act has not been defined, but it must mean the cause, which is beyond the control of the party from approaching the Court invoking the aid of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The reason given by the petitioner is that on 27-08-2008, his wife i.e., 2nd petitioner fell ill and therefore, he took her to Hyderabad for treatment and stayed at Hyderabad for one month and after he returned to the village, he enquired his Advocate, who informed him that ex-parte decree was passed. On coming to know about the same, a petition was filed and there was a delay of 55 days in filing the petition under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. On the ground that day-to-day delay has not been explained properly, the trial Court dismissed the application. Day-to-day delay need not be explained in a mathematical precision. If the explanation given in the affidavit filed in support of the petition is sufficient to condone the delay, the delay can be condoned. The explanation given by the petitioner is that he took his wife to Hyderabad for treatment and he stayed there for one month and thereafter, he returned to the village. As sufficient cause is shown for not filing the petition within the time, the delay can be condoned. 5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting aside the order, dated 23-06-2008, in I.A.No.448 of 2008, in O.S.No.70 of 2008, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. There shall be no order as to costs. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED: 12-10-2009 Hsd