Back
High Court of Andhra Pradesh
G. CHANDRAIAH
T.Ravinder Raju And Another
Versus
The Singareni Collieries Company Ltd.
C.R.P.NO.4190 OF 2010
Decided on : 16-11-2011
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The defendant in the suit is the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, represented by its General Manager, and is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act (!) .
The suit was filed for declaration of the plaintiffs as legal heirs of a deceased individual, but was returned due to non-compliance with the notice requirement under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) (!) .
The core issue is whether the defendant, as a company, qualifies as a 'public officer' or a 'Government' entity under Section 80 of the CPC, which mandates prior notice before filing suit against the Government or a public officer (!) (!) .
Section 80 of the CPC requires that a notice in writing be served on the appropriate authority or officer, stating the cause of action, the plaintiff's details, and relief sought, at least two months prior to filing the suit, unless an urgent relief is sought with court permission (!) - (!) .
The definition of 'public officer' in the CPC includes persons such as judges, members of All India Services, officers of the military, officers of courts, and officers empowered to place or keep persons in confinement, among others (!) - (!) .
The court clarified that a company, even if considered an instrumentality of the State under constitutional provisions, is not automatically a 'Government' or a 'public officer' under the CPC unless its officers are in service or pay of the Government or remunerated by fees or commissions for public duties (!) (!) .
The defendant company is not directly in the service or pay of the Government, nor are its officers considered 'public officers' under the relevant legal definitions (!) (!) .
Judicial precedents indicate that statutory bodies or instrumentalities of the State, which are not under direct control or pay of the Government, do not qualify as 'Government' or 'public officers' for the purposes of Section 80 CPC (!) - (!) (!) - (!) (!) .
Therefore, the requirement of serving notice under Section 80 CPC does not apply to the defendant company in this case, as it is not a 'Government' or a 'public officer' within the legal definition (!) .
The court allowed the revision, overruled the objection, and directed that the suit be numbered and disposed of in accordance with law, emphasizing the distinction between a 'Government' and an instrumentality of the State (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
Heard both the counsel.
2. The petitioners herein are the plaintiffs. They filed the suit in O.S.(SR).No.228/2010 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Parkal, for declaration against the defendant, which is the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Bhupalpally, Warangal District, represented by its General Manager, to declare them as legal heirs of late Thokachichu Rama Raju s/o Bucchi raju, Occ: Ex Coal Filler, E.C.No.1702930 KTK 2 Incline, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Bhupalpally, Warangal District, who died on 23.7.2007. The said suit was returned by raising the following objection dated 3.3.2010:
“Heard, returned as the plaintiffs have not served prior notice as required u/s 80 CPC against the defendant.”
3. Challenging the above order, the present revision is filed.
4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the defendant is not Government and only an instrumentally of State and hence no notice as contemplated under Section 80 of the C.P.C. is required to be issued before filing of the suit.
5. In order to examine the above issue, it is necessary to note Section 80 of C.P.C., which contemplates notice to Government and Section 2(17) of C.P.C., which defines ‘public officer’, occurring in Section 80 of C.P.C. The said provisions are extracted as under for better appreciation:
80. Notice:
(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), no suit shall be instituted against the Government including the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir or against a public officer in respect of any act purporting to be done by such public officer in his official capacity, until the expiration of two months next after notice in writing has been delivered to, or left at the office of –
(a) in the case of a suit against the Central Government, except where it relates to a railway, a Secretary to that Government;
(b) in the case of a suit against the Central Government, where it relates to a railway, the General Manager of that railway;
(bb) in the case of a suit against the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Chief Secretary to that Government or any other officer authorized by that Government in this behalf.
(c) in the case of a suit against any other State Government, a Secretary to that Government or the Collector of the district;
and, in the case of a public officer, delivered to him or left at this office, stating the cause of action, the name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff and the relief which he claims; and the plaint shall contain a statement that such notice has been so delivered or left.
(2) A suit to obtain an urgent or immediate relief against the Government (including the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir) or any public officer in respect of any act purporting to be done by such public officer in his official capacity, may be instituted, with the leave of the court, without serving any notice as required by sub-section (1); but the court shall not grant relief in the suit, whether interim or otherwise, except after giving to the government or public officer, as the case may be, a reasonable opportunity of showing cause in respect of the relief prayed for in the suit:
PROVIDED that the court shall, if it is satisfied, after hearing the parties, that no urgent or immediate relief need be granted in the suit, return the plaint for presentation to it after complying with the requirement of sub-section (1).
(3) No suit instituted against the government or against a public officer in respect of any act purporting to be done by such public officer in his official capacity shall be dismissed merely by reason of any error or defect in the notice referred to in sub-section (1), if in such notice-
(a) the name, description and the residence of the plaintiff has been so given as to enable the appropriate authority or the public officer to identify the person serving the notice and such notice had been delivered or left at the office of the appro
SupremeToday
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
