March 18, 1972, which was the last day of limitation.
Raghubar Dayal and Mudholkar, JJ.,
also did number agree with the majority that where a right of appeal is given by, some other law, the appeal must be regarded as the one under the Code of Civil Procedure, inasmuch as the words under the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be read as meaning governed in the matter of procedure by the Code of Civil Procedure.
Subba Rao and Mudholkar, JJ.,
held that the second limb of sub s. 2 of s. 29 is wide enough, to include a suit, appeal or an application under a special or local law which is of a type for which numberperiod of limitation is prescribed in the First Schedule.
In the result, Sinha, C.J., Subba Rao, Raghuber Dayal and Rajagopala Ayyangar, JJ.,
From the Judgment and Order dated the 26th March 1973 of the Patna High Court in Election Petition No.
V. Gupte, S. N. Misra, C. M. Oberoi, D. Goburdhan, K. Verma, U. P. Singh, Virendra Prasad Sinha, D. N. Misra, B. Dadachanji Ravinder Narain, O. C. Mathur and J. B. Jadachanji Co., for the respondent.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1 of 1972.
P. Goyal, Pranab Chatterjee, Santokh Singh and V. C. Parashar, for the appellant.
The appellant an elector in that companystituency presented an election petition on Monday, March 20, 1972, instead of on Saturday.
870 of 1973.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. In the bye election to the Lok Sabha from Darbhanga Parliamentary Constituency held on January 30, 1972, the respondent Lalit Narain Mishra a candidate of the Indian National Congress was declared elected on February 2, 1972, by a. margin of 91,078 votes against his rival Ramsewak Yadava candidate of the Socialist Party at that election.
