KRISHNA DHAN Vs. UMMATUL ZOHRA BEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and are satisfied that the period during which the Court was closed during the vacation must be excluded. Under Order 45, Rule 7, Civil P.C., the appellant had to deposit the security money within ninety days or such further period not exceeding sixty days, as the Court may upon cause shown allow from the date of the decree complained of, or within six weeks from the date of the grant of the certificate, whichever is the later date. The six weeks within which security could be deposited expired during the High Court vacation. If the period expires on a closed holiday, it is not disputed that the time would be excluded in computing the period of six weeks. This is done under Section 10, General Clauses Act (X

(10.) of 1897), which provides that where under any Central Act any act or proceeding is directed or allowed to be done or taken in any Court or Office on a certain day or within a prescribed period, then, if the Court or Office is closed on that day or the last day of the prescribed period, the act or proceeding shall be considered as done or taken in due time if it is done or taken on the next day afterwards on which the Court or office is open. The argument against excluding the period of the High Court vacation is that during this period, or at any rate, a part of it, the High Court Office is open and it has in the past been receiving the security money and other deposits. The fact that to prevent delay the High Court Office receives deposits during the vacation cannot help in the determination of the question. Learned Counsel for the respondent has urged that in Section 10, General Clauses Act, the words "Court" or "Office" have both been used and, if the money can be deposited in the High Court Office during the High Court vacation when the office is open Section 10, General Clauses Act, will not apply. The security money which has to be deposited trades Order 45, Rule 7, Civil P.C., is to be deposited in the Court. The fact that the Court for its own convenience deputes certain officers to receive the money does not give them a separate existence and it cannot be urged that while the Court is closed the office is open. There may be days when the learned Judges are not sitting and yet the Court may not be closed, but if the Court is closed then it cannot be said that the Ministerial Officers attached to the Court are an office within the meaning of the term in Section 10, General Clauses Act, and they have a separate existence from the Court.

(2.) We are, therefore, of the opinion that the money having been deposited on the day the Court re-opened after the High Court vacation and the time for depositing having expired during the vacation the deposit was made within time. The money may be accepted. The office may proceed.