9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (9) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was registered as Misc. case No. 14/1948 and on 25-10-48 the Court after being satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the inability of the plaintiff to proceed with the suit on 16-3-1948, passed the following order : This application for the restoration of the suit T. S. No. 46/44 will therefore be allowed if the plaintiff deposits the sum of ₹ 100/- towards the costs of the defendants within one month from this date failing which this application shall stand dismissed but without costs . 3. On 25-11-48 the following order was passed by the same court. Plaintiff does not deposit ₹ 100/- towards the costs of the defendant as per order No. 34 dated 25-10-48 but he applies for time to deposit the said amount. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... occurring in the order dated 25-10-48. 7. So far as the first question is concerned, there is abundant authority for the view that though Section 9 of the General Clauses Act does not in terms apply to the construction of decrees or orders the equitable principle laid down therein should ordinarily be applied unless there is something repugnant in the subject or context. As pointed out in Halsbury's Laws off England, 2nd Edition, Vol. 32, p. 138 : When a period of time running from a given day or event to another day or event is prescribed by law or fixed by contract, and the question arises whether their computation is to be made inclusively or exclusively of the first mentioned or of the last mentioned day, regard must be had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pression 'fifteen days' would mean fifteen clear days, and that the date of making the order should be excluded. No decision to the contrary has been cited before me, and I would, with respect, agree with the views expressed in the aforesaid decision and hold that the equitable principle of Section 9 of the General Clauses Act should, as a general rule, be applied for the construction of decrees and orders of Courts. Therefore in computing the period of one month, the 25th October 1948 should be excluded. 8. The second question also does not present much difficulty. Section 3(33) of the General Clauses Act says that the expression 'month' shall mean a month reckoned according to the British calendar. Doubtless, this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to have been used in a different sense, denotes a period terminating with the day of the succeeding month numerically corresponding to the day of its beginning, less one. If there be no corresponding day of the succeeding month, it terminates with the last day thereof. 9. Applying the aforesaid meaning to the expression, it will be clear that by the words 'within a month' the Subordinate Judge in his order dated 25-10-48 meant that the sum of ₹ 100/- should be deposited before the 26th of November 1948, that is to say, before the expiry of the Court hours on the 25th November 1948. But the Court as well as the parties seemed to have been under the impression that the period expired by the end of the court hours of the 24t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 25-10-48 of the Subordinate Judge mean that on the expiry of the date fixed in that order the application stands dismissed automatically or else whether a separate order is necessary for that purpose. Mr. Rao relied on 'BALAKRISHNA AYYER v. PAR-VATHAMMAL' AIR 1928 Mad 154 and Mr. Pal relied on 'SURAJMAL v. BHUBANESHWAR PRASAD'. I do not think it necessary to decide this point because in any view of the case, on the 25th November 1948, the Misc. case did not stand automatically dismissed and the court should have waited tilt the expiry of the Court hours on that day. 12. I would, therefore, allow this revision, set aside the orders dated 25-11-48 and 10-12-4S passed by the lower Court and direct the petitioner to pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
