IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU C.M.A.No. 217 OF 1999 Between : Dontamsetti Jogarao and another .... Appellants. A N D Kadiyala Surya Rao …Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO. 217 OF 1999 J U D G M E N T: This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short “ C.P.C”) is filed against the order and decree, dated 28.11.1998, in I.A. No.1421 of 1992 in O.S. No.266 of 1984, on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, whereunder and whereby, the petition under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C. to set aside the exparte decree passed on 19.02.1992 in O.S. No.266 of 1984, was dismissed. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that as the first appellant was suffering from ill-health, he could not attend the court on 19.02.1992; that the trial Court ought to have given an opportunity to the first appellant to contest the case and hence he prays to set aside the impugned order. 3. The appellants must show a sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the court in failing to represent the matter on 19.02.1992. The word ‘sufficient cause’ is not defined under Order 9 Rule 13 of C.P.C. but it must mean a cause which is beyond the control of the party invoking the aid of Section. It is stated that the first appellant was suffering from fever and rheumatic pains, that he could not attend the court on 06.02.1992, and he filed a medical certificate dated 14.02.1992 to show his illness. Even in that certificate also there was no mention about the ill health that was suffered by the first appellant. Therefore, even assuming that first appellant was suffering from ill health, nothing prevented him from attending the court on 19.02.1992, on which date the case is posted for plaintiffs evidence. Similarly, when the suit is posted to 05.08.1991, for trial as a last chance the appellants were taking time by filing applications. At the request of the appellants, the case was posted to 06.02.1992. On that day, appellants filed another application to adjourn the case, but the same was dismissed and posted the suit to 19.2.1992, for plaintiff evidence. So, there is no sufficient cause shown by the appellants for not attending the court on 06.02.1992 and 19.02.1992. Since, nearly for one year the case is being adjourned from time to time at the instance of the appellants. No sufficient cause is shown by the appellants to set aside the exparte decree dated 19.2.1992 in O.S. No. 266 of 1984. Hence, the trial court rightly dismissed the application. The findings are based upon proper appreciation of the material available on record. None of the findings is shown to be perverse or contrary to law. Therefore, there are no justifiable grounds to interfere with the order passed by the trial court. 4. Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed. No costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU. J MARCH 05, 2010. YVL