JUDGMENT :

The present appeal has been filed challenging an order passed by the learned District Judge, Cuttack in RFA No. 135 of 2011 rejecting the memorandum of appeal filed by appellant calling in question the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court in T.A. No. 201 of 1999.

2. This appeal has been admitted on the following substantial question of law :

Whether the impugned order dated 19-7-2013 rejecting the appeal memo on the point of limitation, without any deliberation as to whether the ground of delay taken by the appellants there in is excludable under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 vitiates the order refusing to condone the delay.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the trial Court has erred in law by not condoning the delay in view of the settled principle that when substantial justice and technical error are pitted against each other, the substantial justice would prevail. So, he urges for accordingly answering the substantial question of law. According to him the provision of Section 14 of Limitation Act comes to the aid of the appellant for excluding the period and that having not been discussed the order is vulnerable.

4. Learned counse