Mandatory certified copy requirement made special appeals defective and time-barred where no condonation application was filed.

Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952 required a special appeal to be filed within 30 days and to be accompanied by a certified copy of the impugned judgment or order. Because the rule used mandatory language, non-filing of the certified copy with the memorandum rendered the appeal defective. The certified copy was filed long after presentation, and no application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 was made to explain or condone the delay. In these circumstances, the special appeals were treated as not properly instituted within time and were dismissed as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the special appeals were barred by limitation for not being accompanied by a certified copy of the impugned judgment when presented and for absence of a condonation application under the applicable procedural rules.

Analysis: Rule 134 of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Rules, 1952 required a special appeal to be filed within 30 days and to be accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment or order appealed from. The requirement was treated as mandatory because the rule used the expression that the appeal "shall" be accompanied by the certified copy. The record showed that the certified copy was filed long after presentation of the appeals and no application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 had been filed to explain or condone the delay. In these circumstances, the appeals could not be treated as properly instituted within time.

Conclusion: The special appeals were held to be time-barred and were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing appellate rule makes filing of a certified copy along with the memorandum of appeal mandatory, non-compliance renders the appeal defective and, in the absence of condonation of delay, liable to be dismissed as time-barred.

---