LAWS(KAR)-1959-12-18

CRAGHAVENDRA RAO Vs. VASAVAMBA

Decided On December 23, 1959
C.RAGHAVENDRA RAO Appellant
V/S
VASAVAMBA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point that arises for consideration is the one relating to limitation.

(2.) The facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the point in controversy are these: The petitioner's application (I. A. NO. III) Under R. 90 of O. XXI C.P.C. was dismissed on 21-3-1957; thereafter he filed an application for copy of the order on 22-4-1957 under Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act (which shall be hereinafter called the 'Act'); 21-4-1957 was a Sunday and 20-4-1957 was a penultimate Saturday. According to him, he got the copy applied for by him on 5-6-1957; the appeal was filed on 5-6-1957. The Court below rejected the appeal as being barred by time on two grounds: i.e. (1) the petitioner cannot combine the benefit of S. 4 with the extension of time provided under sub-ss. (2) and (3) of S. 12 of the Act'; and (2) the copy in question was really made really on 3-6-1957 which date had been fraudulently altered to 5-6-1957 and consequently the appeal is barred by time.'

(3.) In view of the finding of the Court below that the copy in question was ready on 3-6-1957, i.e., the date on which the Court re-opened after summer recess, which finding being a finding of fact, it is unnecessary to consider the other point. But as the point has been argued at length, I shall proceed to examine the same. Section 4 of the 'Act' does not extend the period of limitation. It merely provides an application made, after the period of limitation prescribed therefor by the first schedule shall be dismissed." Section 12(2) of the 'Act' lays down that in computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the order appealed from shall be excluded: But if the time prescribed had already expired even before an application under S. 12(2) was made, then the same cannot be received by applying for a copy for the purpose of appeal. In Maqbul Ahmad v. Onkar Pratap Narain Singh, AIR 1935 PC 85, Lord Tomlin speaking for the Judicial Committee observed :