Appellant (plaintiff below) took a non-suit May 24, 1968 from an adverse ruling of the circuit court of Mobile County, sustaining the appellee's demurrers to the appellant's complaint. June 22, 1968, appellant gave notice of appeal to this court from the ruling of the trial court. The transcript was due in this court within sixty days, on August 21, 1968. Rule 37, Revised Rules of the Supreme Court of Alabama, 279 Ala. XXI, XXXVIII; Freeman v. State, 272 Ala. 412, 132 So.2d 141. The transcript was not received in this court until November 21, 1968, and was then marked "Received" but not filed. On the same date, appellant filed a petition for extension of time within which to file the transcript. On November 27, 1968, appellee, Cummins Diesel Sales Corporation, moved to dismiss the appeal and on December 11, 1968, appellant moved to strike appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal and also moved to grant the petition for extension of time.

It being clear, therefore, that the rule has not been complied with, the motion to strike the transcript of testimony must be regarded as well taken. For other analogous cases see: Hornbuckle v. State, 268 Ala. 347, 105 So.2d 864; Freeman v. State, 272 Ala. 412, 132 So.2d 141; Keene v. State, 272 Ala. 596, 133 So.2d 246; Welch v. State, 271 Ala. 199, 123 So.2d 205. We might add by way of gratuitous dictum that although not required to do so, we have studied the entire record in the case, and are convinced that no reversible error is made to appear.

Appellant would invoke the concept of Plain Error to invite our review of the record in spite of the time elapsed since trial and notice of appeal. Occasionally, we find our Supreme Court opining as to what might have been the event had the appeal papers arrived on time. Duke v. State, 264 Ala. 624, 89 So.2d 102; Freeman v. State, 272 Ala. 412, 413, 132 So.2d 141. See Hamm, Case Note, "Gratuitous Pronouncements upon Dismissing Appeal."