It was held that he had thereby waived his right to have the caveat set aside as lapsed u/s.23.The Privy Council held that the limitation of time contained in S.23 was introduced for the benefit of the applicant,to enable him to obtain a speedy determination of his right to have the land brought under the provisions of the Act and that it was competent for the applicant to waive the limit of the three months,and that he did waive it by stating a case and applying for and obtaining an order upon the appellant to state her case both,which steps assumed and proceeded on the assumption of the continued existence of the caveat