KACHI REDDI NAGIREDDI Vs. SAKI REDDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A preliminary objection has been taken that we have no power to extend time or excuse delay in this case and we think that the objection must be sustained. The delay in question is, it is not disputed, more than 150 days. To enable us to excuse it, a power more extensive than that conferred by Section 3(i) of Act XXVI of 1920, whould be necessary. But we cannot hold that we have such a more extensive power, or any general power when in that Section the Court's discretionary power, to extend time for excuse shown, is recognised, subject to any explicit restriction to a period of 60 days. The petitioner has reliance also on the concluding words of Clause 9 of the order in council, dated 9 February, 1920, as conferring an un-restricted power, but those words can be understood as authorising the Court's use of its discretion to the extent specified in the Act and there is no necessity to read them as authorising more. The objection must be allowed. The Petition is dismissed with costs.