NA 3

•k .L' ;lUVI (i' i!' ;\I IJj!1f) )fU i; A. LWSUV\, CIVIL AiP)AL NO 101 OF 198 J;L\I.1lN I • Tifl! 14IHIBUi.R 3\. x1l TATIC,IR AND yourj DVYLOPM1NT Ai'1?1TihANT 2 SlIIflIKA LI USAFIliX 1)Al r::; AhAAM t. pt't,,. P.0'ti It )l y flr t:(Iflp) i:t. with 1 0 () flfl(I (2) , ,Kthcut nf'L4nCc , but wo pr fcr th rn cur th'o f mt. pert. 1.t Al?ry 1rv th(i, purpc () to tOL out bIO1y tho' tr tAir hJc t; i cu. TbQ rotspamllultm iro f*rrnQr øipiouoe, of ti x orid ppUrit, Vxirikft 1R U&f1ri Par CA S'mlacwn. Limited In Yly 992 ; thO r;ocond d&)'v4 th V potdrni+.. Viuncnt... Tio aoton of the in vi cw of the Wiovv 1)c1cgrou1d and po;Lton, ivf. !i1ivji - orgiod t}it the appeal wztc; t lii -1nrrd, it hAving Loch 1ntjtUtr,(I after 1'/.1P,97. An ,ctenrion of tinm wari not gntd by the 1J1 Court to lOdgo tho nntce of appeal, thore wan no letter ,applying, for a copy of thti ocdthj, there wa8 alno no certfcato of doy ''r the Pci.strar of the ugh Court. In term8 of Pulo 83 (2), theroforo, th appollantis cOuld not rely on the except ion to nu1-rule (i). rror, Shivji. according3y prayed that the appeal be otruck out : Jr. Lyuo contended in reply that the appeal was ,ntitutoci n tute. Ho pointod out that notine of appcal wa,-j lodged oi 17.11.98, j.}in ,;upp1:intifl(1y itt'iI Wiu; i:ith1 ttcL nmV!CO on )yimo of t]1E two prtiimnhlry objnet mi::. Ho rmbrnitLed that thin wnn rni attompt to dofont the baien of the bj(ct1onc3 and chrirgoci t)ut it wnrj tartamoux - t to p1iiying around with Uio rul.00 and practcoo of tho Col1rt. Mr. Lynio replica that there win n t1me limit for lodging a nupplomontox'y record and referrd to Rule 92 (3) which providea that the appo1ant may bodgo a sup1omotary record "at any time0t lUs construction o that 'u1 wa3 that it a.p lied avon after pn ojection had boon tckon. After heaiin the arg\mierto we upho'd Prof 1 Shivji arid promiod to p,vo our reasotip in this ruling. - - loavor of thu Court. Any other thtorottion would )od to chnoo and ,iurdity. We woro neitisfi o d, thM thu nUj1emantrrrocord. Wfl5 1ococt. to )r - onpt and dofoctt the pro1mthory o l~ jecti o np a]iondy ocrVQd bn Mr. L)rimo, a n d uso we rqjected it, Fo thQ avoidance of dokibt, wovor, ± nhould go on record that tho uplornent&ry rocord, okrcjn if it wore propo1y lodged, wou14 not have aiGtod tho apl,ollantfl.