VASHNO DASS Vs. DEWAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this regular second appeal may briefly be stated as follows :

(2.) On the facts, as stated in the miscellaneous application for extension of time, there can be no manner of doubt that no good cause is shown. It was not disputed that the time taken in obtaining a copy of the judgment of the lower Court cannot be legally excluded. The time taken for obtaining such a copy may, in some circumstances, be taken into consideration in extending the time under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, but here, even after taking the delivery of the copy of the judgment of the trial Court more than one month after the same was ready, the appeal was not filed for a period of two months. In a case where an applicant seeks indulgence of the Court for extension of the time under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, he has to explain each day's delay and nobody could reasonably believe that the time spent in obtaining a certified copy of the judgment of the trial Court can legally be excluded. There could, therefore, be no hesitation in rejecting this application under Section 5.

(3.) When this appeal came up before me sitting in Single Bench on 15th October, 1973, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants was that even if this appeal was dismissed as barred by time, that would tantamount to a decree being passed by this Court and that in view of the provisions of Section 3 of the Punjab Pre-emption (Repeal) Act, 1973 (Punjab Act No. 11 of 1973), on and from the date of commencement of this Act "no Court shall pass a decree in any suit for pre-emption."