MANGILAL Vs. SITARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision by Mangilal applicant against the order of the district Magistrate, Jodhpur, dated the 16th of October 1956 dismissing his appeal on the ground of limitation.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to it are that the petitioner had filed an application in the court of the Magistrate First Class, Jodhpur, under Section 12 of the Rajasthan premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 for restoration of electric connection which was said to have been cut off by the other party. This application having been dismissed on 8th June 1956, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned District Magistrate, Jodhpur. The appeal was filed on 14th of July 1956. The appellant sought to exclude the period between 14th June 1956 when he bad presented an application for copy of the Magistrate's order and 7th of July 1956 when the copy was actually delivered to him. If this period were excluded, the appeal would have been perfectly within time. This position is not contested even by learned counsel for the opposite party.

(3.) IT has, however, contended by the opposite party in the appellate Court that 21st June 1956 was given to the appellant for supplying the copy. The copy was not ready on that day and so it was not given to him. The copy was ready on 3rd july, 1956 but the petitioner took its delivery on 7th July 1956. According to learned counsel for non-petitioner, the period between 3-7-1956 and 7-7-1956 could not be excluded because the appellant ought to have been present in the court on 3-7-1956 and obtained the copy. This argument found favour with the appellate Court,