S S KAUSHAL Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has challenged order of Single Judge dated 9-10-2000 passed in W. P. No. 4055 of 2000.

(2.) THE appeal was filed on 8-11-2001. It was not accompanied by application for condonation of delay. This application was filed on 31-8-2001. When the matter was considered by the Court on 20-8-2001, the appellant sought time for filing additional affidavit in support of the application, which was granted. However, instead of filing additional affidavit, a detailed application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal has been filed on 1-9-2001, supported by affidavit. Respondents have filed replies to both the applications.

(3.) SHRI Kishore Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for appellant, submitted that he did not file application for condonation of delay along with the appeal because appellant was not required to file certified copy of the order/judgment under Rule XIII (3) of the Letters Patent Rules framed by this Court, effective from June 24, 1994. Precisely, the submission is that under Sub-rule (3), certified copy of the order/judgment is not required since he availed one of the three options available to him under the Rules. Shri V. S. Shroti, learned counsel for respondents opposed the submission and contended that this is not true. According to learned counsel, the requirement of filing certified copy of the order is mandatory even if appellant avails any of the three options. We find great substance in the submission. Close and careful reading of the said provision plainly demonstrates that the requirement of filing certified copy of order or judgment or decree is not dispensed with. It has to be filed under any of the three options available to the appellant. Against the first option, he has to file two certified copies with the memorandum of appeal under Clause 10 of Letters Patent. Against the second option, he has to file one certified copy and one photo copy. Against the third option, he has to file two photo copies of the judgment or order or decree appealed from, which means the certified copy thereof. In the last category, the requirement of filing of certified copy is implicit because filing of certified copy against the two former categories is there. Without certified copy, there is no authenticity of the judgment or order or decree appealed from.