LORD PHILLIMORE, LORD BLANESBURGH, AMEER ALI
J. N. SURTY – Appellant
Versus
T. S. CHETTYAR, FIRM (DEFENDANTS) – Respondent
Judgement
Appeal (No. 56 of 1927) by special leave from two decrees of the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction (June 8, 1925, and February 26, 1926), the first dismissing an appeal from a decree of the High Court in its original jurisdiction, and the second refusing an application for review.
9 Law Rep. 55 Ind. App. 161 ( 1927- 1928)
J. N. Surty V. T. S. C hettyar, Firm 20
The only question in the present appeal was whether an appeal by the present appellant from a decree of the High Court in its original jurisdiction dated January 8, 1925, was barred by limitation.
By the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, Sch. I., art. 151, the period allowed was twenty days. Sect. 12, sub-s. 2, provided that in computing the period the " time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree " should be excluded. By Order xli., r. 1, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a memorandum of appeal had to be accompanied by a copy of the decree as well as of the judgment; but a rule of the High Court, made under s. 122 of the Code, provided that a memorandum of appeal against a decree of the High Court might be presented without a copy of the decree. The terms of s. 12 and of the rule of the High Court are
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.