D C SANKHLA Vs. ASHOK K PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the order dt. 6.10.1994 passed by the learned Single Judge on the preliminary issue as to whether the suit is barred by limitaion. No doubt, this appeal itself is filed with an application for condonation of delay u/S. 5 of the Limitation Act, but for deciding the point raised in (he appeal, we are not taking notice of the S. 5 application.

(2.) . The first respondent filed a suit for recovery of damages for the tort of libel. The alleged insinuation is said to have been made on 11.9.1986 in a newspaper. The plaint was prepared on 10.9.1987 and was presented before the concerned officer authorised to receive the plaint on the Original Side of this Court. The suit was, therefore, treated as a suit coming within Article 75 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act. The said Article 75 says that the suit has to be filed within one year from the date when the libel is published. The presentation of the plaint is, therefore, clearly within limitation.

(3.) . The point, however, raised before the learned Single Judge was that after the plaint was presented it was found to be defective on three counts-(i) the certified copy of the order accompanying plaint did not bear the court fee stamp of 75 paise ; (ii) photo copies of the documents accompanying the plaint werenot attested as true copies ; (iii) the photo copy of a document was in Hindi and it was neither accompanied by translation in English nor the translation charges were paid. Therefore, the plaint was returned to the plaintiff on 15.9 1987 for rectifying objections. It was, however, refiled on 16.10 1987. On 17.10.1987 the Registry returned the plaint pointing out that objection No. 3 was not removed. Thereafter, the plaint was refiled on the same day and was directed to be listed before the Registrar for hearing on admission on 29.10.1987. Thereafter, summons were directed to be issued to the defendants.