Sufficient cause for setting aside an ex parte decree was not proved where defendants delayed proceedings and failed to act despite repeated opportunities.

Sufficient cause was not shown for non-appearance to set aside the ex parte judgment and decree under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. The defendants had been represented by counsel for a prolonged period, yet they failed to file a written statement despite several opportunities and repeatedly sought adjournments, causing the proceedings to remain pending for years. In those circumstances, the plea of lack of knowledge of the suit and the objection that summons were not duly served were rejected, and the application to set aside the ex parte decree was rightly refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had shown sufficient cause for non-appearance so as to justify setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The appellants had been duly represented by counsel for a prolonged period, yet they failed to file a written statement despite several opportunities. The proceedings had remained pending for years because of repeated adjournments sought on behalf of the defendants. In these circumstances, the plea of lack of knowledge of the suit and the contention that summons were not duly served were not accepted, and no sufficient cause was made out for their non-appearance.

Conclusion: The application under Order 9 Rule 13 was rightly rejected and the ex parte judgment and decree was not liable to be set aside.

---