The petitioner is a plaintiff who filed a suit on a promissory note under the summary provisions of Order 37, rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, A summons was issued requiring the appearance of the defendant within ten days on service. On the nth day after service the defendant appeared and moved the Court under Order 37, rule 3, for leave to defend on the ground that the promissory note sued on was a forgery. The learned District Munsiff gave him leave to appear and defend the suit unconditionally overruling a technical contention that there was no provision under the Limitation Act to condone any delay in the ten days given in the summons No.4 in App. B prescribed under Order 37, rule 2.

The learned District Munsiff found some difficulty in meeting a technical argument that the Limitation Act made no specific provision for condoning such a delay. His reasoning to get over the technical argument advanced before him is open to a little criticism. It is true that there is no specific provision in Order 37, rule 2 or in the Limitation Act empowering a Court to condone a delay in appearance beyond the ten days prescribed by the summons in Form No.4. Technicality can be met wit