Short Note : 1. In the appeal the applicants raised an objection that the appeal was barred by time as the appellant could not take advantage of 25-9-75 both on account of the judgment and decree being passed on that date as also on account of an application for a copy of the judgment being filed on that date. The plaintiff-appellant before the lower appellate Court, however, contended that under section 12 limitation Act he was entitled to count 25th September 1975. both on the ground that date had to be excluded because of the judgment and decree having been passed on that date as also because he had applied for a copy of the judgment on the said date. The learned appellate Judge rejected the contention raised by the applicants regarding limitation and held that the appeal was within time. It is against this order that the present revision-application has been filed. Held: From the facts stated above it is clear that the main question raised for consideration in this revision application is as to whether 25th September, 1975, can be excluded twice as prayed for the plaintiff applicant in the lower appellate Court or should be excluded only once for computing the period of limitation. This question, in my opinion is concluded by the three decisions of the Nagpur High Court. In Ramchandrarao & Ors. v. Mayaram, AIR 1928 Nagpur 131, Badshah Miyan v. Pandurang, AIR 1930 Nagpur 113 (FB) and Balkrishna Rajaram Modi v. Baijnath Girdharilal Tiwari, AIR 1939 Nagpur 150. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant tried to distinguish the aforesaid decisions on the ground that in all these three cases the appeal when filed was accompanied both by a copy of the judgment as also with the copy of the decree and that as in the instant case the non-applicant had filed the appeal without a copy of the decree, therefore, on that ground the decisions in the aforesaid cases could not apply. I am unable to accept this contention As already stated above, the question is only about one day. It is not disputed that the date of judgment and decree, i.e. 25-9-75 has to be excluded for the period of computation of limitation for the appeal. I am unable to accept this contention As already stated above, the question is only about one day. It is not disputed that the date of judgment and decree, i.e. 25-9-75 has to be excluded for the period of computation of limitation for the appeal. If that date has also to be excluded on account of being counted under section 12 of the Limitation Act, then the appeal would be within time before the lower appellate Court. In these circumstances, in my opinion, the aforesaid decision are a complete answer to the contention raised by the applicants and the view taken by the Court below cannot be said to be erroneous. Accordingly, I find no substance in this revision. AIR 1928 Nag. 131, AIR 1930 Nag. 113 = 16 MPLC 441 (FB) and AIR 1939 Nag. 150 = 25 MPLC 23 relied on. Revision dismissed.