(1.) C.M.P. No. 9360 of 1993 :-This petition is for condonation of delay of 2,092 days in representing the appeal in AS.SR. No. 55107 of 1987. The appeal is directed against the decree and judgment in O.S. No. 3262 of 1978 on the file of the VII Assistant Judge, City Civil, Madras. The appeal was originally presented in this Court on 6-7-1987. The papers were returned on 18-9-1987 by the Registry for rectification of certain defects. The papers bear the seal of 25-6-1993 as if they were represented on that date. There is no sort of endorsement by the counsel at the time of the alleged representation. The papers were returned by the Registry and the concerned Appeal Examiner has made an endorsement of return on that date itself. One of the returns raised a query as to how this Court is the proper forum to entertain the appeal when the value of the suit in Rs. 26,585/-, that is below Rs. 30,000/-. The Deputy Registrar had initialled the return and made an endorsement, "Time 10 days for representation to proper Court."
(2.) The Deputy Registrar had no jurisdiction to make that order. The return was only to enquire the advocate as to how this Court was the proper forum. After the advocate to give his answer, the matter should be placed before Court for appropriate orders. Moreover, there was a delay of nearly six years by that time in representation and without posting the matter before Court to decide the question whether the delay in representation should be condoned, the Deputy Registrar should not have directed representation to proper Court.
(3.) The papers were presented in the City Civil Court, Madras, on 30-6-1993. The City Civil Court returned the papers on 5-7-1993. One of the endorsements was that the delay in representation should be condoned by the High Court, under the Appellate Side Rules. Again the papers were presented in this Court on 8-7-1993 for condonation of delay in representation. The Deputy Registrar returned the papers on the ground that the value of the subject matter being below Rs. 30,000/-, it is only the City Civil Court which is having jurisdiction. The papers were represented on 15-7-1993 in the City Civil Court once again.