Judgment :- 1. The revision petitioner was the defendant in a suit for money. The suit was decreed against him and he applied for the printed copy of the judgment. He was to deposit the printing charge amount on 26-10-1979. He failed to deposit the amount and the application was struck off on that day. He made an unsuccessful attempt to review that order. An application to condone the delay in remitting the printing charges also was dismissed by the trial court. Undaunted by these failures, the petitioner again filed another copy application for printed copy of the judgment. That also was dismissed and the defendant filed C.R.P. No. 863 of 1980 before this Court. This Court directed the court below to issue printed copy or manuscript copy whichever was applied for by the defendant and the copy application filed by him was ordered to be treated as one filed on 14-1-1980. The defendant-petitioner again approached the court below to get the printed copy of the judgment. The Court below refused to grant a certified copy. 2. The reason given by the learned Munsiff to refuse to grant certified copy of the judgment was that the decree was passed on 28-9-1979 and a copy application filed after the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed for preferring appeal is not maintainable. The Court below however stated that in ordinary printed or manuscript copy of the judgment and decree could be given on payment of requisite charges. 3. Counsel for the revision petitioner contended that the order passed by the learned Munsiff is perverse and unreasonable. The rule as has been understood by the learned Munsiff is stated in para 5 of the impugned order as follows: "As is well-known, the application to obtain a certified copy of the judgment for purposes of appeal has to be filed within the period of limitation prescribed for filing appeals." The rules regarding issuance of certified copy of judgment and orders are R.239 to 254 of the Kerala Civil Rules of Practice. R.239 reads as follows: "239. R.239 reads as follows: "239. Application for copies: (1) Any person entitled to obtain a copy of any proceeding or document filed, in or a the custody of the Court, may present an application therefor as in Form No. 47 setting out the name of the applicant, his position in the suit or proceeding if he is a party thereto, and the description of the document of which copy is required." No time limit has been prescribed by any of the rules enshrined in Chap.7 of the Kerala Civil Rules of Practice. The learned Munsiff also seriously erred in stating that the court was prepared to give an ordinary printed or manuscript copy of judgment and decree on payment of requisite charges. The court can issue certified copy of judgment and decree only in accordance with he provisions in Chap.7. R.254 states that every copy shall bear an endorsement initialed by the Examiner, showing the following particulars: 1. Name of the Court. 2. Year and number of the suit or other proceeding. 3. Name of the applicant. 4. Number and date of the application. 5. Date of calling for stamp papers. 6. Date of production of papers. 7. Date of calling for additional papers. 8.Date of production of additional papers. 9. Date when copy was ready. 10. Date notified for appearance to receive the copy. 11. Date when copy was delivered. So invariably in all the copies issued by the court the above details must be shown. The court below was wrong in stating that an ordinary printed or manuscript copy could be given to the parties. The trial court has no manner of right to say that the certified copy of the judgment issued to the parties should not be used for filing appeal. That would amount to creating unnecessary fetters on the right of appeal. 4. The learned Munsiff drew a distinction between a certified/ printed copy of the judgment issued for the purpose of filing an appeal and copies of judgment intended to be used not for filing an appeal. I see no such distinction between a certified/ printed copy of the judgment and an ordinary manuscript copy of the judgment issued from the Court. The order passed by the court below is unsustainable and therefore the same is set aside. 5. I see no such distinction between a certified/ printed copy of the judgment and an ordinary manuscript copy of the judgment issued from the Court. The order passed by the court below is unsustainable and therefore the same is set aside. 5. The court below is directed to issue authenticated printed copy of the judgment after accepting the printing charges from the petitioner. The court below will issue the same at the earliest. Allowed.