( 1 ) THIS matrimonial appeal by the wife-appellant was preferred beyond the period of limitation but the delay has been condoned under S. 5 of the Limitation Act on an application filed subsequent to the presentation of the appeal. Mr. D. Roze, the learned counsel appearing for the husband-respondent has now urged, and has urged very seriously, that the order condoning the delay under S. 5 of the Limitation Act was patently erroneous for two reasons. Mr. D. Roze has contended that, firstly, S. 5 of the Limitation Act cannot have any manner of application to a matrimonial proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act including an Appeal, and, secondly, even if the Section applies, the application thereunder ought to have accompanied the memorandum of appeal as now required by R. 3a of the Code of Civil Procedure, inserted by the Amendment Act of 1976, and such an application having filed later, the delay could not be condoned.

( 2 ) AN appeal against a decree under the Hindu Marriage Act is provided in S. 28 (1)of the said Act and the period of limitation therefor is prescribed in S. 28 (4 ). It is neither an appeal under the general law, i. e. , the Code of Civ