RAMCHANDRA GANGADHAR KARVE Vs. MAHADEV MORESHVAR PHADNIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two points arise in this appeal, one of which is peculiar to the facts of this particular case, and the other is a more general question. I will deal with the latter first.

(2.) It happened that this appeal was presented beyond the time allowed by law and that an application was made by the appellant to a single Judge of this Court to excuse the delay. That Judge refused to excuse the delay. And here I pause to remark that this order had the effect of dismissing or rejecting the appeal and that it was an order of a final character, not of an interlocutory character. The appellant appealed to a Bench of this Court against that order and the Bench excused the delay, the result of which was that the appeal was admitted and has now come on for hearing.

(3.) It is argued that the order of a single Judge refusing to excuse the delay is not a judgment within the meaning of Clause 15 of the Charter of this High Court and that therefore no further appeal lay. But seeing, as I have said, that the order had the very drastic effect of dismissing or rejecting the appeal, it seems to me it must be taken to fall within the meaning of the word judgment as used in Clause 15, and I think therefore that there is no objection to our disposing of this appeal on its merits.