LALTA PRASAD Vs. SHYAMMOHAN LAXMINARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts leading to this appeal in short are that the judgment of the trial Court was pronounced on 25-1-1957. It is admitted that 26th and 27th January, 1957 were public holidays. After the reopening of the Courts the judgment-debtor applied for copy of the judgment which was given to him in four days. He filed the appeal on 1-3-57. This appeal after excluding the days spent in obtaining a copy i.e. four days is admittedly beyond time if period of limitation is computed from 26th January 1957, and on this ground the learned District Judge, Gwalior, has dismissed it.

(2.) The question for decision in this case is whether in computing the period of limitation, two days i.e. 26th and 27th January on which the courts admittedly remained closed, because of the public holidays, should be excluded or not. It seems there is a conflict of judicial opinion on the point. On the one hand the view taken in Puttulal v. Bhagwan Dass, AIR 1938 All 106 and Subramanyan v. N. Narasimham, AIR 1920 Mad 359(2) is that where a judgment is pronounced on a day prior to the vacation of the Court and an application for a copy is not made till several days after the reopening of the Court, the applicant cannot be entitled to deduct the period of vacation. On the other hand I have been referred to Debi Charanlal v. Mehdi Hussain, AIR 1916 Pat 317 which has taken a contrary view.

(3.) With great respect to the learned Judges, I find myself in accord with the Patna view. The determination of the question really depends upon the interpretation of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, and particularly in determining the meaning of the expression "the time requisite for obtaining copy of the decree". The judgment in this case was pronounced on 25th January and ordinarily the time would run from the 26th January. But where the 26th and 27th January were admittedly public holidays, no application for a copy would be presented because the Court was closed. In the circumstances it is just and proper that these two days should be excluded in computing the period of limitation.