R. K. Manisana, J.-In this appeal, the maintainability of it has been questioned. Under Rule 8 of Chapter VA of the Gauhati High Court Rules (Rules for short), the Memorandum of Appeal from the judgment of a Single Judge in any proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment. A free carbon copy of the judgment certified as true copy, which was sent to the appellant, has been filed in this case. The carbon copy is also not stamped, 2. The question which arises for consideration is whether a free carbon copy of the judgment certified as true copy sent to the party can be called as "certified copy". 3. Section 76 of the Evidence Act provides : "Certified copies of public documents, - Every public officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees therefore, together with a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such document or part thereof, as the case may be, and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed, whenever such officer is authorized by law to make use of a seal; and such copies so certified shall be called certified copies- Explanation.-Any officer who, by the ordinary course of official duty, is authorized to deliver such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody of such documents within the meaning of this section." , emphasis supplied) 4. A reading of section 76 makes it clear that a certified copy is a true copy of the original document coming out of a public office and certified by an officer authorized by law as true copy of the original. But learned counsel for the respondent, Sri DK Das, has submitted that a free copy of the judg­ment cannot be used for preferring appeal for the party preferring the appeal should apply for certified copy of the judgment appealed from in view of section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act. 5. The question then is,-Is it necessary that the party preferring the appeal should apply for certified copy of the judgment appealed from? 5. The question then is,-Is it necessary that the party preferring the appeal should apply for certified copy of the judgment appealed from? Chapter XIII of the Rules provides, inter alia, that a stranger to the suit may also, as of course, obtain a copy of the judgment; that every Advocate engaged in any case shall be entitled to obtain from the Court's office a copy of the whole or any part of the proceeding; and that copy of any judgment, civil or criminal, passed by the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction may be supplied to the 'press' on formal application made and after payment of required fees. Under proviso to sub section (2) of section 363, CrPC, where sentence of death it passed, or confirmed by the High Court, a certified copy of the judgment shall be immediately given to the accused free of cost, whether or not be applies for the same. Certified copy of the order or judgment may also be furnished to any other Tree of cost by the order of High Court under Rule 37, Chapter XIII. This being the position, it is not necessary that the appellant must apply for the certified copy of the judgment to obtain the same because what is required is that the Memorandum of Appeal is to be accompanied by the certified copy of the order or judgment appealed from; no matter that it was obtained without applying for the same. However, in certain cases, it may be necessary that the party preferring the appeal may have to apply for certified copy to avoid facing of legal consequences that may arise for failure to obtain certified copy by the appellant or his agent. Therefore, the provision under section 76 that every public officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees therefore, is referable to a class of public documents which a person has right to inspect them as there are privileged documents, the disclosure of which may be refused by the appropriate authority. For these reasons, the contention of the learned counsel cannot be sustained. 6. The next question which arises for consideration is whether a carbon copy of the judgment or order certified as true copy of the original can be accepted. For these reasons, the contention of the learned counsel cannot be sustained. 6. The next question which arises for consideration is whether a carbon copy of the judgment or order certified as true copy of the original can be accepted. Under Rule 13 of Chapter XIII of the Rules provides that no carbon copy shall be certified as true copy. Under Rule 38 of Chapter XIII, in case of urgent application for certified copy of the judgment, or order, xerox or photostat copy of the same duly certified by an officer authorized to do so by the Registrar may be supplied to the applicant. Section 63 of the Evidence Act provides : "Secondary evidence. - Second-try evidence means and includes- (1) certified copier given under the provisions hereinafter contained; (2) copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies ; (3) copies made from or compared with the original; ... ..." Under section 63 of the Evidence Act, a certified copy is a secondary evidence. Copies made from original by mechanical process and which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy and the copies compared with such original copy are also secondary evidence. Xerox or photostat copies are made from the original by mechanical processes. Under Rule 35 of Chapter XIII of the Rules, such copies can be certified as true copy. But Rule 13 of Chapter XIII of the Rules specifically provides that no carbon copy shall be certified as true copy of the judgment. A carbon copy of the original also is within the meaning of section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, being a copy made by a mechanical process which has insured its correctness. But the carbon copy which has been filed in this appeal is not a carbon copy of the original judg­ment. It is a carbon copy of the copy made from the original and compared with the original. As already stated, it is certified to be true copy. It is stated at the Bar as well as in the application for condonation of delay that it is the practice of the Ai/awl Bench to send copies of the judgments certified as true copy free of cost; and that no folio or court-fee is available in Mizoram. As already stated, it is certified to be true copy. It is stated at the Bar as well as in the application for condonation of delay that it is the practice of the Ai/awl Bench to send copies of the judgments certified as true copy free of cost; and that no folio or court-fee is available in Mizoram. It is true that under the Rules no carbon copy should be certified as true copy. It is perhaps to ensure accuracy of the copy (certified copy) as most of the carbon copies are unreadable. In the present case, carbon copy of the judgment has been typed out again and the first copy of which has been filed along with the Memorandum of Appeal. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that Rule 13 of Chapter XIII of the Rules has been sufficiently complied with, and it can be accepted provided court-fee is paid, if chargeable. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents have referred us to a decision of Kerala High Court reported as Mala jalam Plantations Ltd vs. C1T, AIR 1959 Kerala 34, in which it has been held that a free copy given to the assesses under section 33 (1) of the Income-tax Act is not a certified copy within the meaning of section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act even though it was a copy of the original order. On a reading of the judgment of the Kerala High Court, it is not clear whether the free copy of the order communicated to the assessee was certified copy. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the decision does not help us in the present case. 8. The next question which arises for consideration is whether court fee is chargeable on such certified copy. Rule 13 of Chapter XIII of the Rules provides that "in case of certified copies, the court-fee chargeable under the Court Fee Act shall be paid by affixing necessary stamps to the first folio of the copy." 9. 8. The next question which arises for consideration is whether court fee is chargeable on such certified copy. Rule 13 of Chapter XIII of the Rules provides that "in case of certified copies, the court-fee chargeable under the Court Fee Act shall be paid by affixing necessary stamps to the first folio of the copy." 9. Under section 4 of the Court Pees Act, 1870, no document of any of the kinds specified in the First or Second Schedule to the Act annexed, as chargeable with fees, shall be filed, exhibited or recorded in, or shall be received or furnished by any of the High Courts, other than the High Courts of Kerala, Mysore and Rajasthan, in any case coming before such Court in the exercise of its extraordinary original civil jurisdiction; or in the exercise of its extraordinary criminal jurisdiction etc. unless in respect of such docu­ment there be paid a fee of an amount not less than that indicated by either of the said Schedules as the proper fee for such document. 10. In Custodian Evacuee Property vs. Prabhu Dayal, AIR 1960 Punjab 298, the Punjab High Court, relying on the decisions in Shahadat vs. Hukuni Singh, AIR 1924 Lahore 401, and Md Fazal Llahi vs. Ram Lai, AIR 1935 Lahore 124, held that where the trial Court's judgment was not stamped it could not be deemed to have been filed at all and it could not be allowed to be stamped after the period of limitation for filing appeal had expired. 10A. It may be stated here that it is not disputed, in the present case, that if the required court-fees are not paid, the judgment cannot be accepted. It. In view of the above discussions, certified copy which has been filed is chargeable with court-fees. But, as already. stated, certified copy has not been stamped. 10A. It may be stated here that it is not disputed, in the present case, that if the required court-fees are not paid, the judgment cannot be accepted. It. In view of the above discussions, certified copy which has been filed is chargeable with court-fees. But, as already. stated, certified copy has not been stamped. Section 149, CPC, provides- "Power to make up deficiency of court-fees.-Where the whole or any part of any fee prescribed for any document by the law for the time being in force relating to court-fees has not been paid, the Court may, in its discretion, at any stage, allow the person, by whom such fee is payable, to pay the whole or part, as the case may be, of such court-fee ; and upon such payment the document, in respect of which such fee is payable, shall have the same force and effect as is such fee had been paid in the first instance." Under section 149, CPC, Court at any time and at any stage can order for payment of required court-fees. At this stage, it will be helpful to refer to the decisions of the Supreme Court reppfftdjasreported as Mahasay Ganesh vs. Narendra Nath Sen, AIR 1953 SC 431 , and Munna Lal vs. Chhotka Bibi AIR 1971 SC 1374 . In Mahasay's case (supra), the Supreme Court has held that the question of payment of court fees is primarily a matter between the Government and the person concerned and therefore where the High Court in the exercise of its discretion allows the appellant to amend his Memorandum of Appeal and grants time for payment of deficit court-fee under section 149 the other party cannot attack the order on ground that it takes away his valuable right to plead the bar of limitation. In Maman Lal (supra) the Supreme Court has held that section 149, CPC, mitigates the rigour of section 4 of the Court Fees Act and it is for the Court to harmonise the provisions of both the Court Fees Act and CPC by reading sesetionbl49, CPC, as proviso to section 4 of the Court Fees Act and allowing the deficit to be made good within a period of time fixed by it. If the deficit is made good no possible objection can be raised on she ground of fear of limitation, as section 149 expressly provides that the document is to have validity with retrospective effect. 12. In the above view of the matter, if the Court exercises its power under section 149, CPC, the defect in filing appeal is cured and the question of limitation cannot be raised. 13. The question then is, Whether the provisions of section 149, CPC, can be extended in writ appeals ? Section 141, CPC. provides that the provisi­ons of the Code shall not be applicable to any proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution. The principle underlying, section 149 CP(Q founded) on public policy or policy of law. We are, therefore, of the view that the principle underlying section 149, CPC, can be extended in the interest of administration of justice on ground of public policy or policy of law. 14. Considering the peculiar feature of the case, it will be just and fair if the appellants are directed to pay court-fees prescribed. We do so accordingly. 15. In the result, the appellants are directed to pay the court-fees prescribed on or before 14th October, 1993. The application for condunaJi9O! of delay shall be considered after payment of required court-fees.