S.C. Pandey, J.

1. The Civil Appeal No. 48-A/99 was dismissed by the Lower Appellate Court on the ground that it was barred by time. It is not in dispute that the appellant-plaintiff did not file any application for condonation of delay. The Court below had no option but to dismiss the civil appeal as the Order 41 Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure were not complied with. It is clear from the plain language of Order 41 Rule 3-A of the Code of Civil Procedure that a memorandum of appeal shall be accompanied by an application supported by affidavit setting forth the facts on which the appellant relies to satisfy the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within such period. Admittedly, this application was not filed. It is also very clear that this provision was added by CPC (Amend.) Act, 1976 with effect from 1-2-1977. It is apparent from the language of Rule 3-A of Order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure that the question of limitation has to be decided prior to admission of the second appeal, after hearing the parties on merits of the application for condonation of delay. It appears that the civil appeal was admitted without noticing the fact th