JUDGMENT :- This is an appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, against the order of the District Judge, Manipur, dated 10-1-1958 directing the issue of Succession Certificate to the respondent. The appeal was filed on 26-6-1960 and the appellant has stated in the appeal memorandum that he came to know of the order of the District Judge in the last week of May, 1960. But he has not mentioned the actual date in May when he came to know of it and he wants the delay to be condoned under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act.

In order to condone the delay under Sec. 5, the appellant must satisfy the Court as to the exact date when he came to know of the order of the District Judge, dated 10-1-1958 and he must I further explain the reason for the delay of every day after he came to know of it. That he has not done in the present case, as he has failed to mention the exact date when he came to know of the order. This appeal memo and the application to excuse the delay were filed only on 6-6-1960. The appellant has made no attempt to explain the delay for the period between the date of his coming to know of the order and the date of filing of the appeal. On that ground alone, this appeal has to be dismissed as time-barred.

2. Then, again the appellants learned Advocate stated in the course of arguments that a villager in the said village had filed an application for revocation of the Succession Certificate under Sec. 383 of the Indian Succession Act and the said application was dismissed and that it was after its dismissal that he filed the present appeal. It follows from this that the appellant must have been aware of the said proceedings which meant that he was aware of the order of the District Judge earlier than May, 1960. Thus, I am not satisfied that this is a case where the delay can be condoned under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act.

3. Coming to the merits, the appellant cannot succeed in this appeal and the proper procedure for him is clearly to file a suit to establish his right. The respondent filed the application for Succession Certificate claiming that after the death of his brother Taorem Chaoba Singh, who was the Shebait of the deity Laipakhangba in Changangei village, the respondent became the Shebait and that he was therefore entitled to the amount of compensation granted by the Government to the said deity as ex-gratia compensation for damage to the standing crops on account of requisition during the last war of the patta land of the deity.

The respondent stated in the said application that the deceased Chaoba Singh has got no other family or relative except himself and so he did not make any other person a party to the application. Notice of the application was served as required under Section 373(1)(b) of the Succession Act. No rules for the publication of such notice have been made by this Court.

The District Judge therefore directed that notice must be affixed on the Notice Board of the District and Sessions Court and must be served on Chingangbam Kulabidhu Singh, Secretary of the Changangei Seva Dal and that one notice must be affixed in a conspicuous part of the residence of the deceased. Notices were accordingly served. It was after this that he took the evidence of the respondent and directed the issue of the Succession Certificate on 10-1-1958.

But the certificate is still in the custody of the Court and has not been issued to the respondent. Perhaps, it was because one of the villagers filed the application under Sec. 38-3 of the Succession Act for revocation of the certificate. That application was dismissed by the District Judge. No appeal has been filed against the said order. Then the present appellant who was not a party in the Succession Certificate proceedings has filed the present appeal against the order granting the certificate claiming himself to be the Shebait of the deity after the death of Chaoba Singh.

4. Now Sec. 384 of the Succession Act, under which this appeal is filed says that subject to t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document