Sections 5 and 14 of the State Limitation Act are not applicable to the computation of the limitation period for an appeal under the Central Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.

1. The short point that falls for consideration in this appeal is: Whether Sections 5 & 14 of the State Limitation Act, are available in computing the period of Limitation of an appeal under the Central public premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short, the Central Act)?

2. It arises in this way: Appellant is a licensee of a shop in Hotel Ashok, Jammu, belonging to respondent No. 1. His license was to last for three years vide agreement dated 1-4-1983 expirable on 31-3-1986. On the expiry of his license, eviction proceedings were initiated against him by the Estates Officer under the Central Act. He reacted by filing writ petition No. 957/86 in this Court and obtained interim stay order against his evicition. This order was subsequently modified by a Division Bench of this Court providing as under: -

".... Respondent (ITDC) shall be at liberty to take possession of the shop in question from the petitioner subject to the result of writ petition in accordance with the procedure established by law..."

It appears that pursuant thereto fresh eviction proceedings were taken against the appellant and the order of eviction passed on 3-6-1988. He appealed against this order before District Judge, Delhi, on 16-6-1988, when under Sec. 9 of the Central Act, he was required to file this appeal before the District Judge where the premises was situated i.e., District Judge, Jammu. This appeal naturally was dismissed on 9-8-1988 on the point of lack of jurisdiction,

3. Appellant thereafter filed a fresh appeal on 13-8-1988 before Addl. District Judge, Jammu, and while doing so, did not seek condonation of delay. However, he filed an application for condonation of delay on 18-1-1989 under Secs. 5 & 14 of the State Limitation Act. On consideration, his appeal was dismissed as time barred by order dated 19-9-1992 on the ground that neither of the two sections were applicable in computing the period of limitation for filing appeal. Aggrieved by this he filed O.W.P.No.889/92 in this Court which was also dismissed vide order dated 17-2-1994 upholding the stand taken by the Addl. District Judge. He has now filed this appeal to assail the order of learned Single Judge on variety of grounds. Some of the relevant grounds taken are: (a) that the impugned Judgment had been passed without hearing on 17-2-1994 and no rejoinder was obtained from the appellant; (b) that the appeal is a continuation of the suit and consequently Sec. 14 of the State Limitation Act was available for computation of the period of limitation of appeal; (c) that even in the absence of Sec. 14 the Courts below should have condoned the delay under Sec.5 as good cause had been shown by the appellant; and (d) that the appellant could not be punished for the wrong advice of his advocate.

4. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant pressed only two grounds into service. According to him, even when Sec. 14 was not attracted, the appellate Court should have condoned the delay keeping in regard the circumstances provided in Sec. 5 of the State Limitation Act. Alternatively he urged that the appeal being continuation of the suit, there was no impediment in the application of Sec. 14 while computing the period of limitation of the appeal. He relied upon AIR 1962 SC 361, AIR 1974 Punjab & Haryana 229 and some Judgments of this Court including 1983 KLJ 18, 1981 KLJ 42 and 1979 JKLR 686.

5. The grounds taken and the submissions made, in our view, are misconceived and misdirected. It should be taken well settled by now that Section 14 in terms does not apply in computing the period of limitation of an appeal. This is clear from the text of the provision itself clauses (1} & (2) of which significantly omit the Appeal from its purview and specifically make it applicable only to a suit and an application. The relevant portion of these clauses is extracted as hereunder: -

" 14(1) In computingthe period of limitation prescribed for any suit, the time during which the