GANPAT BHAWANIPAL Vs. RAMCHARANLAL RANJITSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FROM a decree passed by the Civil Judge Second Class, Gwalior on January 19, 1959, an appeal was filed on March 5, 1959, in the Court of the Additional District Judge Gwalior. A copy of the decree was filed with the memorandum of appeal, but a copy of the judgment was not filed. Objection was raised at once. The Additional District Judge has held that the appeal was filed after the limitation had expired. In computing the time prescribed for the appeal, he did not take into account the fact that the decree was signed on February 6, 1959. He has observed in the judgment: "If it is held that the time between the date of the judgment and the actual date of signing the decree is computed as requisite time the present appeal is within time. It is clear to me that the attention of the first appellate Court was not invited to the Division Bench decision of the Nagpur High Court reported in Bhagwan and others v. Liquidator of Co -operative Society 1955 NLJ 286.

(2.) THE appellate Court dismissed the appeal also on the ground that it was incompetent for want of a certified copy of the judgment appealed from. Shri Swami Saran contends that he made an application for dispensing with a copy of the judgment. This application was not made when the appeal was filed, but it was made later on March 9, 1959, However the appellate Judge did not dispense with the copy inasmuch as no prayer was made for dispensation at the time of filing the appeal. If the appellate Court has, in his discretion, not dispensed with the copy of the judgment, I am not prepared to interfere and hold that he should have. The appeal was, therefore, incompetent. Chetanlal v. Dau G.S. Gupta AIR 1938 Nag 233.