of the respondent and since the same was not brought to the knowledge of the Court by the Bench Clerk, the suit was dismissed for default for nonpayment of batta erroneously. Therefore, the Trial Court allowed the application on payment of cost of Rs.1000/-. Now it has to be considered whether this reason can be accepted for condoning the delay of 906 days in restoring the suit by the Trial Court. On perusal of the support affidavit, it is only mentioned that since the respondent / plaintiff was suffering from Diabetics, he was unable to proceed with the suit. For which, no medical evidence produced on the side of the respondent / plaintiff. The affidavit does not set out the details of the treatment taken by the respondent / plaintiff. The only claim made in the affidavit is that the plaintiff was suffering from Diabetics. The Courts below completely ignored the provisions of Order IX, Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 and proceeded to dispose of the application before it on wrong notions of principles of justice. The Courts below was obviously carried away by sympathy. It had over looked the provisions under Order IX, Rule 9 of CPC. Under the rule, the Court should be satisfied that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of the plaintiff when the suit was called for hearing. In this case, the question of satisfaction of the Court as to what was sufficient 4/7
