J.B. Koshy, J.

Power of the court to condone the delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act in Public interest to avoid denial or substantial justice is one of the issues considered in this judgment. For deciding that issues interpretation of the words ‘sufficient cause’ appearing in section 5 of the Limitation Act, on the facts of each case assumes importance. Common order dismissing I.A.No.1879 of 1997 to set aside the award passed in O.P. (Arb.) No. 19 of 1996 and I.A.No.453 of 2005 to condone the delay in filing the above application are challenged in these proceedings. An award passed by the sole arbitrator was forwarded to the Court by letter dated 8-2-1996 and on getting notice, appellant-State appeared on 30-5-1996. Time was allowed for filing objection. Within the time allowed for filing the objection, State filed I.A.No.1879 of 1997 on 29-3-1997 for setting aside the award. There was delay of 315 days in filling the petition for setting aside the award. When objections were raised on the ground of delay, the Sub Court condoned the delay in filing the petition for setting aside the award by order dated 9-12-1999, even without a formal petition for condonin