G.P. Srivastava v R.K. Raizada

• An ex parte decree was passed against the appellant. He applied to set it aside, relying on his illness supported by an affidavit and a medical certificate. The trial court rejected the medical certificate because it came from a private doctor, and the High Court dismissed his revision.

1. How "sufficient cause" under O.IX R.13 should be construed.

• "Sufficient cause" is an elastic expression to be construed liberally, particularly when no negligence or inaction is imputable to the party. It refers to the date on which the absence led to ex parte proceedings, and earlier negligence that was condoned cannot be relied on. Where the defendant approaches the court promptly, the discretion is normally exercised in his favour. The ex parte decree was set aside on payment of Rs.5,000 costs and the trial court directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously.

The courts have wide discretion to decide sufficient cause on the facts; the inquiry is confined to the date of non-appearance, and a defendant who moves promptly should ordinarily be given a chance to defend.