Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.47 seconds)Shyam Sundar Sarma vs Pannalal Jaiswal And Others on 4 November, 2004
Mr. Bhattacharyya, appearing on behalf of the opposite
parties, refers to the decision of Shyam Sunder Sarma Vs. Pannalal
Jaiswal and Ors. reported in AIR 2005 SC 226 and submits that the
decision reported in AIR 1976 Cal 415 (FB) is not at all a good
law in view of the decision of AIR 1956 SC 367 as observed in AIR
2005 SC 226. Therefore, the petitioners should have preferred a
second appeal against the rejection of the application under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act. In this regard, I find that the
ratio of the decision referred to in AIR 1956 SC 367 is altogether
5
different one from the appeal in question. The facts as stated in
the AIR 2005 SC 226 are not also similar to those of the present
one. Therefore, the contention of Mr. Bhattacharyya that against
the order of rejection of the application under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, a second appeal would lie, I hold, cannot be
accepted.
1