deemed to be service of notice within the meaning of Order 41 Rule 22 and the period of limitation of one month would start from that date. This judgment of the Supreme Court clearly contemplates that the parties would have argued the appeal on merits and the same would be taken up for hearing on merits. The provisions of Order 41 Rule 22 enables a party to file a Cross Objection only when an appeal is filed and when the Court hears the appeal on merits. In Rajasthan High Court in Ramkripal v/s. Radheshyam and Others AIR 1970 Rajasthan 234, a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court had occasion to consider the contention that the Cross Objection could be canvassed independent of the appeal. The Court held that a Cross Objection can be entertained only if the Court issues notice to the respondent on the appeal, after the Court assumes jurisdiction and decides to hear the appeal. We agree with this view. In the present case, in our view, the Court had not assumed jurisdiction to entertain the appeal since the appeal was rejected at the very preliminary stage. Since the applicant had filed its Cross Objections even before the appeal was heard for admission, the issue of limitation may not arise. However, filing of the Cross Objection before time in that sense does not entitle the applicant to a hearing of the Cross Objection on merits in the absence of the appeal being admitted.