I count your attempt at 40 chars:

          #1234567890123456789012345678901234567890
perl -wle "$a=<>;($x=<>)>0?$_+=$x:0 while$a--;print
[download]

My attempt is 23 chars:

          #123456789012345678901234
perl -wle "print 0+map{1..<>}2..<>"
[download]

Likely there are ways to improve on that, for example the space between print and 0 likely can be eliminated. If you use Perl 5.10 or higher, you can replace print with say, shaving off another two characters.

Update: Relaxing the condition of respecting the number of items in the first line doesn't shorten the code for me:

          #123456789012345678901234
perl -wle "<>;print 0+map{1..<>}<>"
[download]

oh! Thank u very much Corion for ur Quick Reply!

Im focussed on getting a hold of this language!

Thanx again :)

Using ~~ inchworm secret operator saves a stroke:

          #1234567890123456789012
perl -wle "print~~map{1..<>}2..<>"
[download]

Update: The inchworm secret operator is more clearly described here. I remember it from good old TPR0 way back in 2002. You can read all about TPR0 and the other early Perl golf tournaments by downloading Terje/mtv's excellent Book of Perl Golf.

Relaxing the first line restriction allows 20 strokes (which can probably be further shortened):

         #12345678901234567890
perl -pe "$.>1&$_>0and$\+=$_}{"
[download]

This time we use the }{ eskimo greeting secret operator in harness with Eugene's infamous $\ trick.

It's customary to include the switches in the count as a lot of code can be replaced by switches. For example, switching to say actually saves 3 chars.

     12345678901234
perl -le"print ..."
perl -E"say ..."
     12345678901
[download]

#         12345678901234567890123456
perl6 -e 'get;say [+]lines.grep: *>0'
[download]

26 character if you don't count the quotes.

It was in PERL Only!!!

Check this link yourself

I don't believe it!

I don't believe it can be done "legitimately" in six strokes. Only by "cheating". I have no experience of spoj competitions, but it looks like solutions are accepted automatically by a robot referee (i.e. without a human checking each submitted solution for correctness). With this sort of automated judging, part of the game (lamentably IMHO) is finding a way to trick the robot into accepting an invalid solution. In the past, cheating has been common at codegolf sites with automated judging. For example:

• In The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part IV), I describe a cheat where I exploited the Perl $^T current time variable by submitting my solution to the codegolf server at the precise time when $^T had the required value. My "solution" was incorrect; it worked only at that particular moment in time.
• In a more outrageous example, John Fremlin describes a cheat using System V IPC message queues. His "solution" was utterly bogus; he just tricked the robot into accepting it via a low level exploit of the codegolf server.

In your spoj game, one (bizarre) rule that may be exploitable is:

Score equals to size of source code of your program except symbols with ASCII code <= 32.

Why on earth would they make such an arbitrary rule? This is not true golf IMHO. It's also possible there are bugs in their robot referee or test program for this particular game (e.g. a poor or very small set of fixed test data) which may be exploited. But, to me, this sort of activity is not really golf anymore; it's more akin to finding exploits to hack into web sites.

As for an example of a short program, I may go for:

perl -nE'/-/ or$x+=$_}{say$x'
[download]

The number of inputs will be given as the first input.

This is why the first number needs to be skipped. And seemingly, that number counts itself as the input as well, if we assume the example to be correct. I'm not sure what the program is supposed to do with input that goes beyond the announced number of lines.

Ah, duh. I should learn to read questions correctly. Having a number as the first line of input telling how many lines the input consists of is so not needed in Perl, that I just didn't pick up on that.