DARSHAN LAL ETC. Vs. RAM RATTAN ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application purporting to be under Ss. 148, 149 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by Shri Chhabil Dass, learned Counsel for the Appellants. R.S.A. No. 60 of 1970 had been filed in the High Court on 9 -6 -1970 against the judgment and decree passed by the District Judge dismissing the appeal of Shri Darshan Lal and affirming the judgment and decree passed by the Senior Sub -Judge.

(2.) The Appellants, it appears, did not file the certified copy of the trial Court judgment with the memorandum of appeal and one month's time was granted by the Court, vide, its order, dated 16th June, 1970, for filing the same. The said judgment, according to the report of the office, dated 10th August, 1970, was filed by the Appellants in the Court, but it was not indicated in the report whether the same was filed within time or not. Further the copy of the judgment of the trial Court was filed without any Court -fee being affixed on the same,

(3.) The case came up for hearing before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice on 4th April, 1975, and a point was raised with regard to the date on which the certified copy of the trial Court judgment was filed by the learned Counsel for the Appellants. As already indicated the Appellants were granted one month's time for filing a certified copy of the trial Court judgment, but in the report of the office there is nothing to indicate when the same had been filed. However, Shri G. C. Banta, Clerk of Shri Chhabil Dass, Advocate, had filed an affidavit on 2nd April, 1975 to the effect that the copy of the trial Court judgment was filed within the period allowed by the Court. Shri H. S. Thakur, learned Counsel for the Respondents, was allowed fifteen days' time for filing the reply to the affidavit, but, it appears, that thereafter on 5th June, 1975, the Appellant filed this C.M.P. wherein it was stated that the certified copy of the trial Court judgment required to be produced in addition to the judgment and decree appealed against, did not bear the necessary Court -fee stamps of Rs. 1.25 and further that the Court -fee stamps on the said copy could not be affixed due to an oversight and inadvertent mistake and, therefore, he prayed that he may be allowed to affix the Court -fee on the judgment of the trial Court. Shri H. S. Thakur opposed this application.