THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.2526 of 2008 ORDER: Challenging the order dated 02.04.2008 made in I.A.No.611 of 2007 in an unregistered appeal on the file of the District Judge, Karimnagar, this Civil Revision Petition has been filed. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners and the respondents and perused the material available on record. A petition was filed by the revision petitioners under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Order XLI Rule 3-A of C.P.C. to condone the delay of 880 days in preferring the appeal against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.06.2003 passed in O.S.No.122 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar. There was a delay of 880 days in filing the appeal. The reason for the delay was that appeal has been filed in this Court on 02.12.2003 and the same was returned by the Registry for presentation before proper court on the point of pecuniary jurisdiction. Later, it seems that the file was misplaced in the office of the Advocate, and therefore, there was delay. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the delay on the ground that the delay has not been explained satisfactorily. The word ‘sufficient cause’ has not been defined under the Limitation Act, 1963. It must mean a cause which is beyond the control of the party invoking aid of the provision. If a person is prevented by a sufficient reason, then it can be said to be a cause within the meaning of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The reason for the delay is that, in the first instance, the revision petitioners filed the appeal in this Court within the time. But, on the ground of pecuniary jurisdiction, the appeal was returned by the Registry. Thereafter, the bundle was taken back by the learned counsel for the revision petitioners in this Court and it was not returned to the petitioners as the file was misplaced in the office of the counsel. Therefore, no negligence or inaction can be attributable to the petitioners herein, in not filing the appeal in time before the competent court. As the delay has been satisfactorily explained, it can be condoned and the delay is condoned. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed, setting aside the impugned order, and the delay in presentation of the appeal is condoned. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ K.C.Bhanu,J Dated: 18.06.2010 Bud