AIR 1964 SUPREME COURT 993

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Allahabad)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): B. P. Sinha, Ajit Kumar Sarkar, N. Rajagopala Ayyangar , JJJ

(A) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.9 R.7, O.9 R.13— Good cause and sufficient cause - Distinction. There is no material difference between the facts to be established for satisfying the two tests of "good cause" and "sufficient cause". There cannot be a "good cause" which is not "sufficient" as affording an explanation for non-appearance, nor conversely a "sufficient cause" which is not a good one and further either of these is not different from " good and sufficient cause" which is used in this context in other statutes. If, on the other hand, there is any difference between the two, it can only be that the requirement of a "good cause" is complied with on a lesser degree of proof than that of "sufficient cause" assuming the applicability of the principle of res judicata to the decisions in two proceedings, if the Court finds in the proceeding under O. 9 R. 7 the lighter burden not discharged, it must a fortiori bar the consideration of the same matter in the later proceeding under O. 9 R. 13 where the standard of proof of that matter is, if anything higher.(Para 8) (B) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.9 R.7— 'Where the Court has adjourned the hearing of the suit ex parte" - Meaning of - Entire hearing completed and court adjourning suit for pronouncing judgement - O.9 R.7 does not apply. ....