RAM RUP AGRAHRI Vs. NAIK RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendants appeal from an order dismissing an appeal as being barred by time.

(2.) The claim was decreed by the first Court on 17 of December 1924, and the defendants applied for the copies of the decree and judgment on the 23 of December. These copies were ready on the 5 January. An, appeal was preferred by the defendants on the 17 of January 1925, through a vakil whose vakalatnama was filed along with the memorandum of appeal. Later on it was discovered that the names of the appellants and the name of the vakil were omitted from the body of the vakalatnama which was, however, signed by the appellants and the vakil. On the 12 of February 1925, one of the appellants who was present filed a fresh vakalatnama duly signed by him with an application praying that the omission might be deemed to have been cured. The learned Judge, however, held against the defendants and dismissed the appeal on the ground that it had not bean properly presented.

(3.) On the 18 of February 1925, an application for fresh copies was made and granted on the 19 of February on which data a fresh appeal was filed. In an application accompanying the appeal its was prayed that time should be extended under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Another Judge before whom this appeal came up for hearing has declined to extend the time and has dismissed the appeal as being time-barred.