Ntare v. Shinganya EACA Civ. App. 10-D-71; 15/7/71; Spry V. P., Law and Mustafa JJ. A.

Ntare v. Shinganya EACA Civ. App. 10-D-71; 15/7/71; Spry V. P., Law and Mustafa JJ. A.

An ex parte decree was passed. An application to set it aside was out of time, but the judge who heard the application allowed it “exercising inherent powers in the interests of justice”. Against his decision this appeal was brought.

Held: (1) “We think it must succeed. Section 3 of the Indian Limitation act, which applied at the relevant time, is mandatory and it is not suggested that section 5 has been extended to applications under O. IX r. 13. We held in Osman v. United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. [1968] E. A. 102 , that the inherent powers of the court cannot be involved to override the express provisions of the Limitation Act and we can see no reason to depart from that decision …. The law is clear and we have no discretion.” (2) Appeal allowed.