KANEEZ FATIMA Versus GHULAM MUHAMMAD

ORDER

1. SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.‑ The petitioner has been aggrieved by the dismissal of his second appeal by the High Court on the ground that the appeal was not accompanied by a copy of the judgment of the trial Court as required under Order XII1, Rule b., read with Order XLI, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It appears that this omission escaped the notice of the Bench admitting second appeal to a regular hearing. The omission was discovered by the learned Single Judge of the High Court before whom the appeal appeared for a regular hearing. It was, however, then too late to repair the damage as the time had run out for putting in the copy of the judgment of the trial Court.

2. It has been contended before us that once the appeal has been admitted to a regular hearing, the mere omission to fit‑ a copy of the trial Court's judgment cannot affect the competence of the appeal, and that the learned Single Judge could and should have permitted the petitioner to put in the judgment within a specified time.

3. It appears that for consideration of a similar question leave was granted by this Court in Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 5711 of 1972 on the 12th of July, 1973. We, accordingly, grant leave to appeal. Security for costs Rs. 1,000, Prayer for stay is refused.

4. Leave granted.