AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Norman, J.—The question is whether the appeal before me is in time. The ninetieth day was February 21, 1937, which was a Sunday and the following day February 22, 1937, was a public holiday. The appeal would thus have been in time if presented on the 23rd. Actually it was presented on February 16, but was not accompanied by copies of the judgment and the decree which the Court was asked to dispense with. On February 19, 1937, the Court made an order dispensing with a copy of the judgment, but refusing to dispense with a copy of the decree. A copy of the decree was asked for on February 23, obtained on March 1, and filed the same day. Assuming the appeal to be properly filed on March 1, and deducting the requisite period to obtain copies, the appeal is in time. But the office view is that the time taken for obtaining copies cannot be deducted because the copies were not applied for until after the ninetieth day. An opposite view was taken in Siyadat-un-nissa v. Muhammad Mahmud ILR (1897) All. 342, and in my view that judgment is correct. I therefore find that the appeal is in time.
No order as to costs.