MAHARAJ BHAWANI SINGH Vs. SITARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal must fail on the ground of limitation. The judgment in this case was delivered on 5-11-64 while the appeal was filed on 28-8-65. The copy-was applied for on 12-1-65 and 19-1-65 was fixed as the date for the delivery of the copy. It was ready on the same date but the delivery was taken on 11-8-65.

(2.) IT is contended on behalf of the respondents that the appeal is heavily time barred. The appellant having taken the stand that he was not notified of the 19th January, 1965 at the date for the delivery of the copy nor was any notice affixed on the notice board to this effect, a query was raised with the lower court. The reply received from the lower court vide letter dated 8 5-67 is very clear that 19-1-65 was notified to the agent of the Vakil for the delivery of the copy and that the copy was ready on that date. But the appellant failed to appear to receive the copy which he eventually did on 11-3-65. Beharidas vs. Jagdish (A. I. R. 1958 Raj. 7) is an authority on this point and lays down that the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree cannot refer to any period antecedent to the appellant asking for a copy or to any period subsequent to its being ready for delivery.