MD. JABER ALI Vs. ADAR RAHMAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the Plaintiff arises out of an action for declaration of title and confirmation of possession in respect of the Plaintiff's half share in 2 plots of land, which are mentioned by patta numbers. In periodic patta No. 58, there are 77 bighas and 7 lechas of land, and in patta No. 33, there are 11 bighas, 4 kathas and 10 lechas of land. The trial Court held that out of patta No. 58, the Plaintiff was entitled to an area of 31 bighas, 3 kathas and 8 lechas, and out of the other patta No. 33, he was entitled to 3 bighas, 2 kathas and 15 lechas. The learned Subordinate Judge, however, gave a decree in the following terms:

(2.) IT appears that the Plaintiff having not been satisfied with the decree of the trial Court, went up in appeal to the learned District Judge, and the Defendants also filed a cross -objection on the ground that the Plaintiff not having paid the deficit court -fee within the time allowed by the judgment, he could not take any advantage of the decree which had been passed in his favour, by the trial Court. The learned Additional District Judge has held that the extension of time given by the trial Court was illegal and without jurisdiction and, therefore, the deficit court -fee not having been paid within the time allowed by the judgment, the suit failed in its entirety. According to him, the appeal being an appeal against a decree which was not in existence, it was dismissed, and the cross -objection allowed. It is in these circumstances that the Plaintiff has come up to this Court in second appeal.

(3.) IT has to be borne in mind that the time given by the judgment for payment of deficit court -fee was to expire on 30 -3 -1957, and that just a day before that, on an application by the Plaintiff, it was further extended, and then within the extended time the deficit court -fee was paid. It is well settled that rules of procedure are intended to further justice, and not to hinder it, and a Court must make all efforts to do justice if it could possibly be done. Now, in this connection, Sections 148 and 149, and Order 20, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure have to be read.