Judgement

RAMASWAMI, J. : These four consolidated appeals are brought, by special leave, against the order of the High Court of Gujarat, dated November 27, 1961 summarily dismissing four Special Civil Applications Nos. 704 to 707 of 1961 which had been filed by the appellants under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, dated July 18, 1961.

2. The appellants had applied for compensation to the Jagir Abolition Officer, Baroda, under S. 13 of the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953, hereinafter referred to as the Jagirs Abolition Act , in respect of their proprietary jagirs. Against the award of compensation made by the Jagir Abolition Officer the appellants preferred appeals under S. 16 of the Jagirs Abolition Act. Although these appeals were filed before the Revenue Tribunal at Bombay, the appeals were transferred, on the bifurcation of Bombay State, to the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal at Ahmedabad, hereinafter called the Tribunal . All these appeals were ultimately dismissed by the Tribunal for non-prosecution on account of non-appearance of the advocate of the appellants. Against the dismissal of the appeals for non-prosecution the appellants filed application for restoration before the Tribunal on May 6, 1961. The appellants contended that since the orders passed dismissing the appeals were received by them on April 9 and April 20, 1961, the restitution applications filed on May 6, 1961 were within 30 days of the receipt of the order of dismissal and hence the applications for restoration were made in time under Regulation 21 of the Bombay Revenue Tribunal Regulations. The appellant also prayed that the applications for restoration should be allowed as they were prevented for sufficient cause from appearing at the hearing of the appeals. The Tribunal rejected the applications holding that they were barred under Art. 168 of the Limitation Act read with Regulation 55 and O. 41, Rr. 17 and 19 of the Civil Procedure Code. The view taken by the Tribunal was that the applications for restoration should have been made within 30 days from the date of the order of dismissal. As the orders of dismissal were made on February 1, 2 and 3, 1961 and the applications for restoration were made only on May 6, 1961, the Tribunal held that they were time-barred. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the restoration applications the appellants moved the High Court of Gujarat under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India but their applications were dismissed in limine.

3. The first question for consideration is whether the orders of the Tribunal, dated February 1, 2 and 3, 1961 are illegal and ultra vires because the Tribunal dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution and there was no decision of the appeals on merits. It was contended that it was obligatory on the part of the Tribunal to decide the appeals on merits and record its decision in view of S. 17 of the Jagirs Abolition Act which states as follows :

"17. (1) The Bombay Revenue Tribunal shall, after giving notice to the appellant and the State Government, decide the appeal and record its decision.

(2) In deciding an appeal under this Act the Bombay Revenue Tribunal shall exercise all the powers which a Court has and shall follow the same procedure which a Court follows in deciding appeals from the decree or order of an original Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"

4. In our opinion, the contention put forward by the appellants is well founded and must be accepted as correct. Section 13 of the Jagirs Abolition Act provides that any jagirdar entitled to compensation under S. 11 or 12 shall, on or before the 3lst day of July 1958 apply in writing to the Collector for determining the amount of compensation payable to him under the said section. Section 13 (2) states that on receipt of an application under sub-s. (1), the Collector shall, after making formal enquiry in the manner provided by the Code, make a