Sm. Ajita Debi vs Musst. Hossenara Begum And Ors. on 9 June, 1976
6. A preliminary point has been taken challenging the maintainability of the appeal. Mr. P. K. Das, Counsel for Ali Asgar Khan, has submitted that leave was granted to prefer the present appeal on the usual undertaking that in the Paper Book they would set out the list of dates relating to the question of limitation. Even the other undertaking to file a certified copy of the order under appeal had also not been complied with. But subsequently leave was granted by this Court to file a supplementary Paper Book, including the said certified copy. Thereafter the said certified copy has been duly filed. But neither in the original Paper Book nor in the supplementary Paper Book, the list of dates relating to the question of limitation has at all been given. Mr. Das has, therefore, submitted that the appellant having failed to comply with the undertaking given to
this Court, this appeal should be dismissed. Reliance has been placed upon an unreported Bench decision of this Court by Lahiri and Bachawat JJ. in Ram Gopal Lachmi Narayan v. Bansidhar Ghanshyam Das delivered on April 5, 1960 in Appeal No. 36 of 1959 (Cal), Commissioner of Income-tax v. Santosh Debt Chamaria, and the unreported Judgment of myself and Chose J. in Appeal No 106 of 1974, (Prahlad Lal Saraf v. Nathmul Bhuwalka) delivered on January 21, 1975 (Cal), where it was held that if the appellant fails to comply with the conditions on the basis of which leave was granted to file the appeal, the appeal should be dismissed.