Short Note : 1. The only point in controversy in the present appeal is whether the appellant had made out sufficient cause for her absence on 31.1.1976. According to the trial Court she failed to establish sufficient cause for her non-appearance on account of illness. Having gone through the evidence on record in that regard, this Court finds that the appellant examined herself and the doctor who treated her. The respondent neither examined herself nor any witness. Even the reply which was submitted to the application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code, filed by the appellant before the trial Court, the respondent did not swear any affidavit in support of her reply. In these circumstances, this Court finds it difficult to appreciate the reasoning of the trial Court that the evidence of the appellant is lacking so as to constitute sufficient cause. Appeal allowed.