The limitation for an application for making a preliminary decree final begins from the date fixed in the decree and not from any other date.

Mudholkar, J—Dr. Abdul Razak Ahmad filed a suit against the respondents on foot of a mortgage and obtained a preliminary decree for sale on 25-9-1937. The decree provided that if the amount declared to be due under the decree was not paid with interest and costs on or before 25-3-1938, the plaintiff would be at liberty to apply for a final decree for sale of the mortgaged property.

The defendants did not pay the amount. Abdul Razak died on 30-12-1937 and thereafter the appellants who are his legal representatives were brought on record on 25-3-1939. It may be mentioned that Abdul Razak had appointed Shri H.K. Bhave and Shri P.P. Damle, pleaders, as his counsel by executing a wakalatnama' in their favour on 4-5-1936.

After his death, Sadasheo Nagoba Wani, Am-Mukhtyar, of the legal representatives of Abdul Razak, executed a 'wakalatnama' in favour of Shri Bhave and Shri Damle on 7-3-1938. It was signed in token of acceptance by Shri Bhave alone but not by Shri Damle.

2. On 30-4-1942, Shri Damle presented an application for making the decree final. This application was not signed either by any of the appellants or by the Am-Mukhtyar, or by Shri Bhave, but by Shri Damle alone. It was not verified either.

3. In the Court below the objection initially taken on behalf of the respondents was that the application for making the decree final was barred by time as it was not presented within three years from the time allowed to pay the amount. The appellants contended that defendant 1 Chintaman (who died during the pendency of this appeal and is now represented by respondent 1) had made an application to the Debt Conciliation Board, that that application was pending before it from 14-9-1937 to 15-9-1938 and that 'they were entitled to the exclusion of this period from the period of limitation applicable to the application.

They also contended that Chintaman had applied for the amendment of the decree by reduction of interest and the decree was amended on 28-9-1940 and that their application having been filed within three years of that date was within time.

4. During the pendency of the application before the Court below, an application was made on behalf of Chintaman on 1S-1-1943 for quashing the proceedings before it on the ground that Shri Damle who had presented the application for making the decree final had no power to act on behalf of the appellants.

A copy of that application was offered to Shri Damle who refused to accept it and this fact was noted on the application. The Court made the following endorsement on the application: Filed by Mr. W.D. Datey, pleader on 18-1-1943. Put up on 23-1-1943, the date fixed for hearing.

5. A persual of the order-sheet of that date would however show that the application was not taken up for consideration on 23-1-1943, but the entire case was adjourned to 27-2-1943 on the ground that Shri Dam.ie had made an application ii day previous for the adjournment of the case as he had taken ill.

The case was heard not on 27-2-1943 but on 27-3-1943, yet the application was not taken up even on that date. Arguments were however heard on the appellant's application for making the decree final and that application was dismissed on 30-3-1943 by the order under appeal.

6. Before us a preliminary objection was taken by Shri Kedar on behalf of some of the respondents to the effect that the proceedings before the Court below were wholly without jurisdiction inasmuch as the application to make the decree final had been presented by a person who had no authority to act on behalf of the appellants. In support of his objection Shri Kedar placed reliance on - K.L. Gauba v. Indo-Swiss Trading Co. Ltd., 1936 AIR(Lah) 500, - Ananga Bhima Deo v. Madano Mohono Deo, 1937 AIR(Mad) 239, and - Sheikh Palat v. Sarwan Sahu ,1920 AIR(Pat) 581. According to these decisions the presentation is invalid if it was made by am unauthorised person.

7. In - ' Kanhaiya Lal v. Panchayati Akhara, 1949 AIR(All) 367, it was held that the presenta