PAWAN KUAR Vs. RAM KALI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All that has happened is that the situation is back to the order dated 29 June 2001 when the High Court passed its order on a Civil Revision No. 1524 of 2000 Mostt. Pawan Kuer Vs. Smt. Ram Kali Devi and Anr.

(2.) Whatever may be the reason for permitting the Plaintiff to make amendments in the plaint, the sum total on the order was that it would be (a) on payment of cost and (b) within three weeks from the date of the order of the High Court, effective 29 June 2001, three weeks ended on 20 July 2001. This aspect is recorded by the court below itself in the last but one paragraph of its order.

(3.) Learned Counsel at the bar are not at issue that 13 days were taken for obtaining the certified copy of the High Court order. The order was dispatched to the counsel at the district court. The cost could have been deposited 13 days post 20 July 2001. According to the court below, the cost had been deposited one day late. There was yet time to deposit the cost. The court below has taken too technical a view and should have seen the effect of the computation of the limitation to do substantial justice. This was opposed on behalf of the Defendants when the cost according to the Defendants was being deposited one day late, when, in fact, the Plaintiff had 13 days more to deposit the cost. It was a frivolous objection which the court below ought not to have permitted.