Law:

Section:

(a) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)----- Art. 168--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.XLI, Rr. 19, 18, 17 & 11--­Non-appearance of appellant is a category of non-prosecution as the failure to deposit costs for service on the respondent --- Article 168, Limitation Act, 1908 which uses the expression "for want of prosecution" in the wider and comprehensive sense covers the default of appearance as well as non-deposit of costs. Non-appearance of the appellant is a category of non-prosecution as the failure to deposit costs for service on the respondent. It would, therefore, follow that Article 168 uses the expression "for want of prosecution", in the wider and comprehensive sense to cover the default of appearance as well as non-deposit of costs. This view is in consonance with the apparent legislative intent as expressed in the provisions of Rule 19 of Order XLI, C.P.C. Under this Rule application can be made for readmission of appeal dismissed under sub-rule (2) of Rule 11, or Rule 17 or Rule 18. Out of these three situations, only Rule 18 deals with dismissal for failure to deposit costs. The other two provisions deal with the dismissal of appeal as a result of default in appearance on the part of the appellant. English Practice and Procedure from the Annual Practice, Vols. I and II 1963 ref. Lal Dino and others v. Deputy Commissioner and others 1982 SCMR 201; Fazil Khan v. Muhammad Azim and others PLD 1954 Bal. 21; Messrs Rehman Weaving Factory v. Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan PLD 1981 SC 21; Kaviraj Rai v. Dass and others AIR 1953 All. 368; Mating PO Tu v. C Chaung Taik 15 IC 358 and Sonubai Baburao Gaikawad v. Shivajirao Krishnarao AIR 1921 Born. 20 distinguished. Lachman Singh v. Hasi Rani Singh and others AIR 1979 Cal. 196; Keepilacheri Parkum Cheepothi Ammed and others v. Vannathankandiyil and others AIR 1916 Mad. 473; Chamroo Singh and another v. Ragho Singh and others AIR 1937 Pat. 624; Kaviraj Rai v. Dass and others AIR 1955 All. 368; Ghulam. Hussain Mahomed Ali v. Ahmad Gul and others AIR 1935 Pesh. 110; Krishna Charan Modan v. Chinibasi Mondal AIR 1925 Cal 269; Maung PO Tu v, C. Chaung Taik 15 1 C 358; Sonubai Baburao Gaikawad v.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492