B.M.LAL, J.

1. The State Government of Bihar and others, who are appellants in this Letters Patent Appeal, have presented this appeal on 2-7-96. The appeal appears to be barred by 146 days i.e. 4 months and 27 days. An Interlocutory application being I.A. No. 443 of 1997 has been filed on behalf of the appellants praying for extension of period of limitation.

2. Having heard learned counsel Mr. K. P. Yadav for the appellants and Mr. M. P. Shukla for the respondents, we proceed to examine whether the requirements for extension of period of limitation have been fulfilled by successfully establishing and proving good cause and sufficient cause, which actually prevented the appellants from filing the appeal well within the period of limitation and justifying the delay of 146 days i.e.4 months and 27 days.

3. To deal with the case, we may mention here that sufficient cause and good cause are not defined under the Limitation Act. But in common parlance one may draw an inference that they mean a cause which is beyond control of the party seeking aid of Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act and that is why the term sufficient cause has been couched in Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act. Therefore