Skip to content


Maun Hakmichand Jagjivan Vs. Maun Vanmali Jagjivan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectLimitation
CourtGujarat High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1966)7GLR215
AppellantMaun Hakmichand Jagjivan
RespondentMaun Vanmali Jagjivan and anr.
Excerpt:
- .....the appellant's contention is that his application is within time because of an application for leave to appeal to the supreme court which he had filed and be contends that the time spent in pursuing that application should be excluded. his contention is that the application is, in fact, an appeal to the supreme court. an application for leave to appeal under article 136(1)(c) and an application for special leave to appeal under article 137 of the constitution should be excluded from the computation of the period of limitation. it is clear in article 133(1)(c) of the constitution that an appeal lies to the supreme court after the high court certifies that the case is a tit one for appeal.2. after the grant of a certificate, a regular appeal has lo be filed in the supreme-court. it is.....
Judgment:

V.B. Raju, J.

1. The appellant's contention is that his application is within time because of an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court which he had filed and be contends that the time spent in pursuing that application should be excluded. His contention is that the application is, in fact, an appeal to the Supreme Court. An application for leave to appeal under Article 136(1)(c) and an application for special leave to appeal under Article 137 of the Constitution should be excluded from the computation of the period of limitation. It is clear in Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution that an appeal lies to the Supreme Court after the High Court certifies that the case is a tit one for appeal.

2. After the grant of a certificate, a regular appeal has lo be filed in the Supreme-Court. It is only then that the appeal is filed the same argument applies in the case of Article 136 of the Constitution. The period, therefore, taken in filing an application for leave to appeal or for a certificate cannot be treated as period taken in appeal and therefore the period cannot be excluded from the limitation. The execution application was, therefore, rightly dismissed. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.


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