9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (1) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the suit is barred by limitation. No doubt, this appeal itself is filed with an application for condonation of delay u/S. 5 of the Limitation Act, but for deciding the point raised in (he appeal, we are not taking notice of the S. 5 application. The first respondent filed a suit for recovery of damages for the tort of libel. The alleged insinuation is said to have been made on 11.9.1986 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; (iii) the photo copy of a document was in Hindi and it was neither accompanied by translation in English nor the translation charges were paid. Therefore, the plaint was returned to the plaintiff on 15.9 1987 for rectifying objections. It was, however, refiled on 16.10 1987. On 17.10.1987 the Registry returned the plaint pointing out that objection No. 3 was not removed. Thereafter, the plaint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d S. 7 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966. The relevant rules are : "1. Presentation at the counter-All plaints, applications and documents shall be presented by the plaintiff, at the filing counter. All such documents filed in Court shall be accompanied by an index in duplicate containing their details. The amounts of court fee affixed or paid on any such document shall also be indicated i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed such reasonable time as he may consider necessary. (b) Where the party fails to take any step for the removal of the defect within the time fixed for the same, the Registrar may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, decline to register the document. (c) Any party aggrieved by any order made by the Registrar under this rule may, within fifteen days of the making of such order, appeal against i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not apply to the filing of the plaints. In fact, that is so elementary to admit of any doubt. Rules 1 and 2 of (O.S.) Rules 1967, extracted above, do not even remotely suggest that the refiling of the plaint after removal of the defects as the effective date of the filing of the plaint for purposes of limitation. The date on which the plaint is presented, even with defects, would, therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
