JUDGMENT : Richards, J. The appeal arises out of a suit brought under section 77 of the Indian Registration Act for a decree directing a sale-deed executed by the defendant-appellant in favour, of the respondents to be registered. Two pleas have been urged in the appeal before us. The first is that the procedure prescribed by the Registration Act had not been followed by the plaintiffs before the present suit was brought, and that consequently the suit was not maintainable. The second plea is that the suit is barred by limitation. As regards the first plea, it is entirely without force. The Sub-Registrar for some reason or other refused to register the sale-deed. The plaintiffs, thereupon appealed to the District Registrar. The application made to the District Registrar was either an appeal under section 72 or an application under section 73, and this order of the District Registrar refusing registration was made either under section 72 or under section 76. 2. It professed to have been made under section 72, so that it cannot be said that the preliminary procedure required before a suit could be brought under section 77 was not adopted. As regards the ‘ plea of limitation the contention is this. The order of the Registrar refusing registration was made on the 5th of September, 1902. The present suit was brought on the 5th of November of that year. The period of limitation prescribed for such a suit by section 77 being 30 days, it is urged that the suit was beyond time. It appears, however, that the Court was closed from 5th October to 4th November, 1902. both days inclusive, and the suit was filed on the day the Court re-opened. Consequently, having regard to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act, the suit was not beyond time. This question was considered in Beni Prasad Kuari v. Dharaka Bai, [1901] I.L.R., 23 All., 277 and the principle of the ruling in that case fully applies to this case. The appeal therefore fails and is dismisses with costs.