from a moonsiff's decision, can be taken to relieve him from the default incurred." JUDGMENT. We remand the case to be tried on its merits, as it has been already ruled that, when the practice of the zillah court has allowed the reception of the grounds of objection beyond the time allowed for filing the petition of appeal itself, the appeal should not be struck off by reason of the grounds being too late. Special Appeal from the decision of Baboo Kashishur Mitter, Principal Sudder Ameen of Hooghly, dated 26th October 1857, reversing a decree of Syed Moazzum Hossein, Moonsiff of Mahanad, dated 26th December 1856. RAMCHUNDER CHATTERJEE, (PLAINTIFF,) Appellant, versus SOOSARMOYEE DASSEE AND OTHERS, (DEFENDANTS,) Vakeel of Appellant-Baboo Baney Madhub Banerjea. Remand as THIS case was admitted to special appeal on the 19th February above. 1858, under the following certificates recorded by Messrs. A. Sconce and J. S. Torrens. MR. A. SCONCE.- -"Petitioner was plaintiff in this case; and the only ground of special appeal is that, as the grounds of appeal preferred by the defendant from the decision of the moonsiff were not filed within 30 days, the appeal could not be heard. "It appears that the moonsiff's decision was passed on the 26th December 1856, that a simple petition of appeal was given on the 29th January 1857, and the grounds of appeal on the 9th March 1857. "I admit the special appeal to try whether the appeal could in this case be legally heard by the principal sudder ameen." MR. J. S. TORRENS.-"I would not admit the special appeal. The appeal having been received under Regulation V. of 1831, and G Remund ss above. the oojoohat also filed, the default, supposing it to be one, of not having filed the oojoohat at the same time with petition of appeal, must, it appears, be held to have been cured." JUDGMENT. With advertence to the different decisions recently pronounced as to the entertainment by the zillah judges of grounds of appeal beyond the period allowed for an appeal, the misapprehension occasioned to suitors by the misdirection of the zillah courts, and the virtual extension of the period of appeal by the acceptance of separate grounds of appeal, we see no ground to interfere in this case, and we dismiss the appeal, with costs. Special Appeals from the decision of Moulvee Ahmed Buksh Khan, MUSST. SOLEHOONNISSA KHANUM AND OTHERS, versus KHAJA ABDOOL GUNNEE AND OTHERS, (PLAINTIFFS,) Vakeel of Appellants-Baboo Kishenkishore Ghose. THESE cases were admitted to special appeal on the 30th MR. J. S. TORRENS." In this case, petitioner was appellant before the principal sudder ameen from the decision of a moonsiff. His appeal was filed on the requisite stampt paper within the month from the date of getting copy of the decision. The petition of the grounds of appeal was filed only on the 9th of March following, and on the 10th of April, certain documents, to meet these pleadings, were filed by the respondents. On the 14th of July, the principal sudder ameen had struck off the case, on the objection taken by respondent, that the grounds of appeal were not filed at the time the appeal was preferred. I admit the special appeal, to try whether the reception of the grounds of appeal by the court, and the documents of respondents being filed after such reception, should not have cured the laches (if it was a laches) of the grounds of appeal not having accompanied the original petition, or whether the court of appeal might not have extended the period for admission of the grounds. This certificate applies also to Nos. 61, 62, and 63." MR. A. SCONCE.-"I rather think petitioner has made out no good grounds to escape from the effect of the decision of 7th January 1857." JUDGMENT. Upon the whole, it seems to us in these cases that the principal sudder ameen, in accepting the grounds of appeal tendered by the appellants on the 9th March, should be held to have exercised the discretion vested in him for extending the period of appeal. We therefore set aside the judgments of the principal sudder ameen, and remand the cases to be tried on their merits. Special Appeal from the decision of Mr. E. Jenkins, Officiating Additional Judge of Tirhoot, dated 4th July 1857, affirming a decree of Moulvee Abdool Wahaub, Moonsiff of Dulsingsurai, dated 21st March 1857. CALLUR SINGH AND OTHERS, (DEFENDANTS,) APPELLANTS, versus MUSST. JHUM KOONWUR, (PLAINTIFF,) RESPONDENT. Vaheel of Appellants-Moulvee Aftaboodeen Mahomed. Vakeel of Respondent-Baboo Meherchunder Chowdree. Remand as THIS case was admitted to special appeal on the 6th March 1858, under the following certificates recorded by Messrs. H. T. Raikes above. and B. J. Colvin. MR. H. T. RAIKES.-"This is an appeal from an order of the judge of Tirhoot striking off his file a large number of appeals from moonsiffs, because, although the grounds of appeal had, in conformity with the practice of the Tirhoot zillah court, been filed within six weeks after preferring an appeal, the appeal was, in the opinion of the judge, incomplete when filed, and therefore inadmissible under the precedent of this court, dated 8th January 1857. "As another appeal, No. 2 of 1858, has been admitted by another bench, to consider the legality of the judge's order, I admit this special appeal also, to be taken up at the same time, though not on the grounds assigned by one of the admitting judges, Mr. Torrens, who appears to me to have assigned reasons for the admission, which are at least quite inapplicable to the present case of appeal." MR. B. J. COLVIN." As I have concurred in admitting No. 2, I admit this also." JUDGMENT. For the reasons assigned in our decision on the admitted special appeal No. 168, Chumun Chowdree, petitioner, we reverse this decision of the lower court, and remand the case to be tried on its merits. A case may now be struck off in the absence of appellant, although not absent on three occasions. Application for Review of Judgment passed by Messrs. H. T. Raikes, B. J. Colvin, and J. H. Patton, in case No. 760 of 1857, dated 24th June 1858. TINCOWREE MOOKERJEA, (APPELLANT,) Petitioner, versus BABOO GOBINDPERSAD PUNDIT, DEPUTY COLLECTOR, PETITIONER pleads that the case was called up for hearing and Application for Review of Judgment passed by Messrs. H. T. SHUSTEEDHUR SURMA BHUTTACHARJ, (ONE OF THE versus LOKENATH SURMA ROY MISSER, (APPELLANT,) Vakeel of Petitioner-Baboo Kishensukha Mookerjee. Application for review of judgment in a suit, dismissed as barred by mitation, admitted to try time had been the law of li whether the PETITIONER, plaintiff's suit was dismissed, as barred by the law of limitation, in reversal of the judgment of the lower courts. Review is now sought on the ground that a wrong calculation was made. The Court held that, by adding the time that the father of plaintiff had lived after Tarinee's death, for whose property the suit was, to the number of years plaintiff had failed to sue after attaining his majority, the suit was barred. But it is now shewn that plaintiff attained majority 11 years, 2 months, and 8 days before suit, properly calto which 6 months 12 days for the father's life being added, 12 years were not exceeded. We therefore admit this review to try whether, by this calculation, plaintiff's suit was not in time, and also to try the other point recorded in the certificate, whether plaintiff can calculate majority at 18 years of age. also to try the date of majority of appellant. culated, and |