SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(Ker) 3

Judges : P.SUBRAMONIAN POTI
E.MOHAMMAD - Appellant
Versus
KUNHAHAMMAD HAJI AND OTHERS - Respondent
Case No : C. M. P. No. 15745 of 1972 in S. A. No. 1216 of 1972
Decided On : 01/05/1973
Advocates Appeared :
T. L. Viswanatha Iyer; E. R. Venkiteswaran; For Petitioner

The main legal principle established in the judgment is the interpretation of S.12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the Explanation, specifically regarding the exclusion of time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree and the preparation of the decree.

Headnote:

DELAY - CALCULATION OF LIMITATION PERIOD - S.12(2) OF THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963 - The court discussed the calculation of the limitation period for filing an appeal, focusing on the exclusion of time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree and the preparation of the decree. The court interpreted S.12(2) and the Explanation, and highlighted conflicting views on whether the time taken by the court in drafting a decree should be excluded from the computation of the limitation period. The court ultimately excused the delay in filing the appeal.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant sought to excuse a delay in filing an appeal, attributing the delay to a miscalculation made in their office. The appellant claimed that the delay was caused by omitting the month of August in calculating the available days for filing the appeal.

Finding of the Court:

The court excused the delay in filing the appeal, accepting the appellant's explanation for the miscalculation and finding no reason to dispute the averments.

Issues: The main issue was the calculation of the limitation period for filing the appeal, specifically regarding the exclusion of time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree and the preparation of the decree.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of S.12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the conflicting views on whether the time taken by the court in drafting a decree should be excluded from the computation of the limitation period.

Final Decision: The court excused the delay in filing the appeal and directed the parties to suffer costs in the petition.

Judgment :-

1. The office note indicates that there is a delay of six days in filing the appeal to this Court. According to counsel for the appellant the delay is only of one day and the note put up by the office indicating that there is a delay of six days is erroneous. As to the delay of one day, an explanation has been offered by counsel and it is urged that the delay ought to be excused. Since the difference between the number of days of delay as noticed by the office and as contended by counsel for the petitioner has arisen from the different approaches made in the matter of reckoning of days to be excluded and since the question is of quite common occurrence, I should go into this matter in detail.

2. The relevant dates for the purpose of this appeal are the following: Table:#1

3. The period of limitation for filing the appeal is 90 days from the date of decree and judgment. Under 0. XX R.7 of the Code of Civil Procedure the decree shall bear date and the day on which the judgment was pronounced. This would be the case even when a decree is actually drawn up later and is also signed later by the judge who has pronounced the judgment. From the period of limitation prescribed for filing the appeal, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree appealed from is to be excluded under S.12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 and similar time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment on which the decree or order is founded is to be excluded under S.12(3) of the Act. Since it may be necessary to refer to the section in due course, I will extract S.12 here:

"12. Exclusion of time in legal proceedings: (1) In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be excluded.

(2) In computing the period of limitation for an appeal or an application for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded.

(3) Where a decree or order is appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed or where an application is made for leave to appeal from a decree or order, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment on which the decree or order is founded shall, also be excluded.

(4) In computing the period of limitation for an application to set aside an award, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded.

Explanation: In computing under this section the time requisite for obtaining a copy of a decree or an order, any time taken by the court to prepare the decree or order before an application for a copy thereof is made shall not be excluded."

Though is the earlier Act, namely the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, there was a corresponding provision in S.12, the Explanation in the Section in the Act in force is new.

4. What is the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree or judgment is a matter on which it could be said that there was considerable controversy. Once the party makes as application to obtain a copy it is not within his volition to get it as early as he would like to. It would depend upon the convenience of the court which issues such copy and naturally therefore the time which is taken for obtaining copy has to be excluded from the period of limitation as a period for which the party is not responsible. Though it may be said that the period commencing from the date on which a party files an application to the date when the application is ready for delivery to him could be excluded, some doubt may arise in working out this in practice. Whether the date on which the application is to be made has to be excluded, whether the date on which stamp papers are called for are to be excluded and if stamp papers are produced on the next working day whether any period has to be excluded on this account, are matters on whic







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top