MANIRAM Vs. FULESHWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Single Judge has referred the following question to the Full Bench for decision :

(2.) THE facts leading to the present reference in brief are : that the appellants/plaintiffs had filed a Civil Suit No. 31 -A/1980 for declaration and possession in the Court of Civil Judge, Class-II, Dhamtari, which was dismissed on 27-1-1982. The appellants thereafter filed an appeal registered as Civil Appeal No. 34-A/83 in the Court of IV Addl. Judge to the Court of District Judge, along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The said application and the appeal were dismissed by the first appellate Court on 24-10-1986. Thereafter, the appellants preferred second appeal, which was admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law :

(3.) THE learned Single Judge was of the view that the decision in Ajit Singh's case (supra) did not consider the effect of judgment of the Supreme Court in Melaram and Sons v. Income Tax Commissioner, AIR 1956 SC 367, while in the case of Laxmi Bai (supra), the point was conceded. According to the learned Single Judge, the decision of the Division Bench in Ajit Singh's case (supra) did not consider if dismissal of the appeal as barred by limitation amounts to confirming the judgment and findings recorded by the trial Court, and that if a decision on the application for condonation of delay filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was treated to be a decision confirming the findings of the trial Court, then an order under newly incorporated provision of Order 41. Rule 3-A, Civil Procedure Code would also amount to confirming judgment and findings of trial1 Court. Hence, the Division Bench case in Ajit Singh (supra) deserves reconsideration.