THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.759 OF 2007 DATED:06-04- 2010. Between K.Venkata Mahalskhmi … Appellant And 1.Pallam Reddy Aruna and two others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO.759 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: This appeal is filed against the order, dated 29-09-2005, in I.A.No.592 of 2004 in O.S.No.13 of 2002, on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole, whereunder and whereby the application filed under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to set aside the ex parte decree passed on 22-01-2004, was dismissed. 2. When a party is prevented from approaching the Court, he must show sufficient cause. As seen from the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the appellant herein was given sufficient time to file written statement, but she has not availed it. Later she filed a petition to set aside the ex parte order and that petition was allowed on payment of costs of Rs.300/-. As the condition was not fulfilled, that petition was dismissed. Thereafter, she filed another application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to restore I.A.No.2112 of 2002 and that petition was also dismissed for default as there was no representation. Another application was moved to restore the I.A., but the same was dismissed for default. Thereafter, a joint memo was filed by the plaintiff and the 3rd defendant. Except stating the above facts, nothing has been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition. She was absent on 22-01-2004. Therefore, there is no reason or explanation given by her for her absence on 22-01-2004. That is the reason why, the trial Court rightly dismissed the application and the said order does not call for any interference by this Court. 3. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. -------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:06-04- 2010 Hsd