DUDHEWALLA AND CO LTD Vs. GOVINDRAM RAMESWARLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are six applications for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a judgement passed by this Court in its civil revisional jurisdiction in six cases. Those cases were heard together.

(2.) The judgment was delivered on 14/1/1952 in all the six cases in the form of separate sections of a single pronouncement and' the learned Judges signed the "judgment at 'the end. The applicants for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court made their first application for a certified copy on 8/2/1952 and we are informed from the Bar that that application was for a copy of the judgment. The requisites were filed on the same day and the copy was ready on the 12th of February next. Delivery of the copy was also taken on the same day. As the application was for a copy of the judgment, what was supplied was only a copy of the judgment.

(3.) It appears that on 21-4-1952 the applicants for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court made a second application for copy and we arc informed that this time they wanted a copy of the decree. The requisites were filed on the same day and the copy was ready for delivery on the 25th of April next. Actually delivery was taken on the 28th of April. As this time the application was for a copy of what was called the decree the office supplied a certified copy not merely of the judgment covering all the six cases signed by the learned Judge, but also a copy of the cost-sheet signed by an Assistant Registrar of the Appellate Side on 8-2-1952. [4]"The applications for leave were filed on 2-5-1952 but the office, besides pointing out several other, defects of form also pointed out that the applications were barred by time, inasmuch as more than ninety day sand the time allowable for obtaining a certified copy of the judgment had elapsed from the date of the judgment, It was, however, added that if the date on which the cost-sheet was signed by the Assistant Registrar was taken as the starting point of limitation or if the period between the date of the judgment and the date on which the cost-sheet was signed was deducted, the applications would appear to be in time. As this was a matter which, in the opinion of the office, was a matter for decision by the Court, it was placed before us and we have heard the parties.