Time and again it has been determined by this and the Supreme Court that where a bill of exceptions containing the evidence is not tendered to the judge of the trial court for approval until after the term at which the motion for a new trial was overruled, such bill is not a part of the record, where the record does not show that any time was granted at the time of overruling the motion for a new trial for the tendering thereof. Crouse v. Crouse (1939), 106 Ind. App. 565, 21 N.E.2d 71; Harker v. Eisenhut (1937), 212 Ind. 67, 6 N.E.2d 936; W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Snider (1935), 207 Ind. 686, 691, 194 N.E. 356; Bolka v. File (1931), 92 Ind. App. 454, 176 N.E. 108; Ernsting v. Stegman (1927), 86 Ind. App. 213, 156 N.E. 520; Conover v. Cooper (1925), 83 Ind. App. 675, 145 N.E. 779; Stremmel v. Gaar, Scott Co. (1911), 176 Ind. 600, 96 N.E. 703. The only ground specified in appellant's motion for a new trial that is presented by it under its Propositions, Points and Authorities, that does not require a consideration of the evidence for its determination, is alleged error of the trial court in giving to the jury of its own motion instruction No. 4.

To become a part of the record on appeal, a bill of 3. exceptions must be approved and filed within the term at which the motion for a new trial was overruled, except in cases where it appears by the record that at the time of the overruling of the motion for a new trial, time was allowed by the court beyond the term, in which to file the same, and that such bill was thereafter filed within the time granted. Sec. 685 Burns R.S. 1926; Stremmel v. Gaar, Scott and Co. (1911), 176 Ind. 600, 96 N.E. 703; Bass v. State (1918), 188 Ind. 21, 120 N.E. 657; Tozer, Admr. v. Hobbs' Estate (1923), 79 Ind. App. 258, 137 N.E. 715; Hatfield, Trustee, v. Ralston (1927), 85 Ind. App. 621, 155 N.E. 221; Bolka v. File (1931), 92 Ind. App. 454, 176 N.E. 108. The bill of exceptions containing the evidence not having been filed during the term in which the motion for a new trial was overruled, and the appellant not having been allowed time beyond the term for the filing of such bill at the time its motion for a new trial was overruled, no question is presented under its second assignment of errors for the consideration of this court.