RAM CHANDRA NAICK Vs. SYED NAZAR ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard Counsel for the appellants in this case we are satisfied that the judgment of the learned Judge of this Court is correct.

(2.) The question raised is one of limitation. A decree was passed on the 23 of April 1918 against a number of persons including the appellants here. That was a decree for costs. This decree was afterwards transferred by the decree-holder to one Saiyid Nazar Ali who figures as the respondent here.

(3.) An appeal was brought to this Court against the decree of the Subordinate Judge dated the 23 of April 1918, and on the 10 of February 1920, the Counsel for the appellants filed an application in this Court, saying that he desired, to withdraw the appeal. He asked the leave of the Court to withdraw it. Notice was ordered to issue and by reason of failure to secure service of notice the matter did not come up before this Court till the 8 November 1920. On that date an order was passed in the following terms: On the application of Mr. Muhammad Yusif, this appeal is withdrawn. The appellant is to pay the costs of the respondents, such costs to be calculated up to the date upon which the respondents had notice of the proposed withdrawal of the appeal.