correctness of that order returning the application for copy could be challenged in the appeal presented before the first appellate court. I am afraid that neither of the contentions upheld. Assuming that there is no vested right conferred on the appellant to challenge the order returning the application for certified copy of the judgment and decree, it is not as if appellant could not have challenged that order in this Court invoking Article 227 of the Constitution. Nor is it possible for the appellant to contest correctness of the order returning the application for copy of judgment and decree in the course of appeal preferred before the first appellate court, for, in my view order returning the application does not in any way affect the correctness or legality of the final decree and judgment and hence is not a matter which could be raised in an appeal before the first appellate court, under Section 105(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. At any rate, if at all the application for issue of copy of judgment and decree was returned, that application ought to have been re-presented so that the date of filing of the application would relate to the date of its first presentation. In this case it is not disputed that a fresh application for copy of the judgment and final decree was preferred on 23.10.2008 much after the period prescribed for preferring an appeal before the first appellate court had expired.
