Find a Lawyer

High Court Appeal No.22 of 1987, decided on 2nd April, 1987.

---O. V II , R.11--Limitation Act (IX of 1908) , S.4--Rejection of plaint- Suit was filed on very first day of re-opening of Court after long summer vacations and amount of court-fee was deposited by plaintiff within limitation period although stamps of court-fee were furnished after expiry of limitation period--Such suit, held, was not time-barred as period of vacation was to be excluded while computing period of limitation and plaintiff had deposited amount of court-fee within limita tion period.

Sadaruddin Qureshi for Appellant.

S. M. Akhtar Rizvi for Respondent.

--This appeal is directed against an order dated 11-1-1987 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Suit No.643/84, whereby he dismissed the present appellant's application under Order VII, Rule 11, C.P.C which was filed on two grounds, namely, that the suit was time-barred as it was filed on 5-8-1984 and that the court-fee stamps were supplied after .the expiry of limitation period. The learned Single Judge in his order under appeal has rightly pointed out that the respondent /plaintiff filed the suit on the first day of the reopening of the Court after long Summer Vacation and, therefore, the period of vacation was to be excluded while computing the period of limitation. As regards the payment of court-fee, he has observed that respondent /plaintiff had deposited the amount of the court-fee within the limitation period though had furnished the stamps of the court-fee on 13-8-1984. The learned Single Judge has exercised discretion properly in the matter. Admittedly the respondent/ plaintiff had parted with the amount of court-fee within the limitation period. The appeal is dismissed in limine.

H.B.T./S-99/K Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.