Skip to content


Raoji Keshav Deshmukh Vs. Krishnarao Anandrao - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLimitation
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberFirst Appeal No. 184 of 1911
Judge
Reported inAIR1914Bom111(1); (1914)16BOMLR516; 25Ind.Cas.369
AppellantRaoji Keshav Deshmukh
RespondentKrishnarao Anandrao
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
practice-second appeal-appeal from decision of appellate court rejecting appeal an time-barred is a second appeal-limitation act (ix of 1908), section 5.;an appeal from the decision of the lower appellate court rejecting an appeal as barred by limitation is a second appeal.;where a judge once provisionally admits an appeal to the file in the absence of the respondent, it is competent to him to entertain at the hearing the objection that the appeal was presented beyond time. - basil scott, kt., c.j.1. we cannot say that as a matter of law there was sufficient cause for extending the time under section 5, and we do not think there was any objection to the learned judge entertaining the question after he had provisionally admitted the appeal to the file in the absence of the respondent. we are of opinion that this is a second appeal and not a first appeal, because it is an appeal from a decree of an appellate court. we dismiss the appeal with costs.
Judgment:

Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.

1. We cannot say that as a matter of law there was sufficient cause for extending the time under Section 5, and we do not think there was any objection to the learned Judge entertaining the question after he had provisionally admitted the appeal to the file in the absence of the respondent. We are of opinion that this is a second appeal and not a first appeal, because it is an appeal from a decree of an appellate Court. We dismiss the appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //