A.D.Koshal, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition raises a question involving the interpretation of Sections 4 and 12 of the Limitation Act 1963 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act).
(2.) TARA Chand and others, the Petitioners before us, are insolvents whose objections against the sale of their property were rejected by the Insolvency Judge, Rohtak, on the 16th of January, 1965. The period of limitation prescribed in the Schedule to the Act for filing an appeal against that order being 30 days, it expired on the 15th of February, 1965, which was a gazetted holiday. The Petitioners made an application for obtaining a certified copy of the order of the Insolvency Judge on the 16th of February, 1965. The copy was ready and was supplied to the Petitioners on the 1st of June, 1965, and on the same day the Petitioners instituted an appeal against the said order before the District Court, Rohtak. Shri Banwari Lal Singal, Additional District Judge, found that the Petitioners were entitled to exclude a period of 106 days, which they had spent in obtaining the certified copy of the order appealed against, in computing the period of Limitation of 30 days prescribed by the Schedule to the Act for the appeal. According to him, however, the appeal was time -barred as the total period of 106 days which the Petitioners could take advantage of expired on the 31st of May, 1965. It is against the order of dismissal of the appeal that the Petitioners have come up in revision to this Court. The petition came up for hearing in the first instance before P. C. Pandit, J., who held that the calculation of the appellate Court was erroneous, the said period of 106 days having expired not on the 31st of May, 1965, but on the 1st of June, 1965, on which date the appeal was filed. It was, however, urged before him on behalf of the Respondents that the Petitioners were not entitled to exclude the period of 106 days for computing the period of limitation within which the appeal could be filed because they had not made the application for obtaining a copy of the order appealed against within the period of 30 days prescribed in the Schedule to the Act as the period within which the appeal could be filed. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, on the other hand, contended before Pandit, J., that the period of limitation for filing the appeal stood extended up to the 16th of February, 1965, under the provisions of Section 4 of the Act and that, therefore, the application for obtaining a copy of the order of the Insolvency Judge was made within limitation. Pandit, J.. found that there was a divergence of judicial opinion on the point and was of the view that it be considered by a larger Bench. That is how the case has been placed before us for decision.
(3.) THE contentions raised before Pandit, J., have been advanced during the course of arguments addressed to us also and it would facilitate a consideration of the point involved if the relevant provisions of the Act are set out here: 2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires. - (j) 'period of limitation' means the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by the Schedule, and 'prescribed period' means the period of limitation computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act. 3. (1) Subject to the provisions contained in Sections 4 to 24 inclusive ), every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made after the prescribed period shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been set up as a defence. 4. Where the prescribed period for any suit, appeal or application expires on a day when the court is closed, the suit, appeal or application may be instituted, preferred or made on the day when the court reopens. Explanation. - -A court shall be deemed to be closed on any day within the meaning of this section if during any "part of its normal working hours it remains closed on that day. 12. (1) In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be excluded. (2) In computing the period of limitation for an appeal or an application for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded. (3) Where a decree or order is appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed, or where an application is made for leave to appeal from a decree or order, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment on which the decree or order is founded shall also be excluded. (4) In computing the period of limitation for an application to set aside an award, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. Explanation. - -In computing under this section the time requisite for obtaining a copy of a decree or an order, any time taken by the court to prepare the decree or order before an application for a copy thereof is made shall not be excluded. It may also be noted here that Sections 3 and 4 occur in PART II of the Act which is headed "Limitation of Suits, Appeals and Applications", while Sections 12 to 24 constitute Part III of the Act which bears the heading "Computation of Period of Limitation".;