MOOL CHAND Vs. VISHALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE only point for consideration in this appeal is whether the appeal filed before the lower appellate court was time-barred.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Court below erroneously believed that an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was necessary and dismissed the appeal as time barred because it had received the application for condonation of delay. The learned counsel for the appellant urges that there was no necessity at all for an application for condonation of delay and that the appeal filed was within lime after excluding the periods taken for obtaining a copy of the judgment and a copy of decree.

(3.) SUB -section (2) of Section 12 of the Limitation Act runs as follows:--