NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Vs. C K MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner is dated 13th August. 1991. A gist of the order was communicated to the petitioner on 17th January, 1992. The petitioner applied for a certified copy of the order on 20th January, 1992, which was ready on 4th May. 1992, and issued on 6th May, 1992, at a time when the Court was closed for the Summer holidays: The appeal was filed on 23rd May, 1992. If the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the order from 20th January, 1992 to 6th May, 1992, is excluded in the computation of the period of time for appeal, the i appeal is in time. But if the time is reckoned from 17th January, 1992, without such exclusion as stated by the office, the appeal is out of time. It has been held by this Court in Viayaraghayan v. Vein, (1973) KLT; 333, that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure apply to appeals under Section 30 of the Workmen Compensation Act, 1923, as the appeal lies to an established Court. The provisions of Order 41, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code are, therefore, applicable and the appellant has to file a certified copy of the order of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner along with the appeal. Having regard to the provisions of Section 29 (2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, it has got to be held that Section 12 thereof applies to such appeals. In that event, the time taken to obtain a certified copy of the order for production along with the appeal is liable to be excluded in the computation of the period of time for the appeal. This was of the view taken by the Punjab High Court in Rajinder Singh v. Labhu Ram Munshi Ram, AIR 1955 Punj 156, with which we are in agreement.

(2.) TIME runs from 17th January, 1992. If the period from 20th January, 1992 to 6th May, 1992, is excluded, the appeal filed on the reopening date of Courts is in time. The office is, therefore, directed to number the appeal.