Limitation Act copy-time exclusion applies to certain Company Act and Letters Patent appeals, even without filing the judgment copy.

Section 12 of the Limitation Act applies to appeals under section 202 of the Companies Act from a Single Judge's original jurisdiction order, so the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the appealed order is excluded even if the memorandum of appeal need not file that copy. Letters Patent appeals governed by limitation rules framed under delegated authority are treated as special law under section 29 of the Limitation Act, making section 12 applicable unless expressly excluded. The contrary view that exclusion depends on filing the copy was rejected, and the earlier inconsistent approach was overruled to that extent.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether section 12 of the Limitation Act governs an appeal under section 202 of the Companies Act from an order of a Single Judge exercising original jurisdiction where the forum of appeal is provided by the Letters Patent, and whether the appellant can exclude the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment even though no copy is required to be filed with the memorandum of appeal; (ii) Whether section 12 of the Limitation Act governs Letters Patent appeals in which both the forum of appeal and the right of appeal are provided by the Letters Patent, and whether the appellant can exclude the time requisite for obtaining a copy whether or not it is filed.

Issue (i): Whether section 12 of the Limitation Act governs an appeal under section 202 of the Companies Act from an order of a Single Judge exercising original jurisdiction where the forum of appeal is provided by the Letters Patent, and whether the appellant can exclude the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment even though no copy is required to be filed with the memorandum of appeal;

Analysis: Section 202 of the Companies Act confers the right of appeal against winding-up orders and places such appeals on the same footing as appeals from orders of the same Court in cases within its ordinary jurisdiction. An order of a Single Judge in original jurisdiction therefore fell within Article 151 of the Limitation Act, and Article 151 was subject to section 12. Section 12(2) directed exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the order appealed from. The circumstance that the High Court rules did not require a copy to be filed with the memorandum of appeal did not take the case outside section 12, because the Privy Council had held that the word "requisite" meant properly required and that the time spent in obtaining copies could still be excluded. The earlier contrary view was treated as incorrect to that extent.

Conclusion: Yes. Section 12 applies, and the appellant is entitled to exclude the time requisite for obtaining the copy; this issue is answered in favour of the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether section 12 of the Limitation Act governs Letters Patent appeals in which both the forum of appeal and the right of appeal are provided by the Letters Patent, and whether the appellant can exclude the time requisite for obtaining a copy whether or not it is filed.

Analysis: For appeals from judgments of the High Court in appellate jurisdiction, the Limitation Act Schedule did not itself prescribe the period, but the High Court rules framed under the Letters Patent fixed the limitation period. Those statutory rules were held to be a special law within section 29 of the Limitation Act, because they were made under delegated legislative authority and had the force of law. Since section 29 made section 12 applicable to special laws unless expressly excluded, the time requisite for obtaining a copy was also excluded in such appeals. The contrary reasoning that Letters Patent rules were not special law was rejected.

Conclusion: Yes. Section 12 governs such Letters Patent appeals, and the time requisite for obtaining a copy must be excluded even where filing of the copy is not required; this issue is answered in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by holding that exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining copies is available in both categories of appeals, and the earlier contrary view was overruled to that extent.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the applicable limitation provision is subject to section 12 of the Limitation Act, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the appealed order is excluded as of right, and statutory appellate rules framed under delegated authority may constitute a special law for the purposes of section 29 of the Limitation Act.

---