Back
1984 Supreme(Kar) 111
Karnataka High Court
M.K.Venkatachalapathy Setty - Appellant
Versus
Sannarasaiah - Respondent
Decided On : 06-21-84
C.R.P. : 2293 of 1982
B.N.DAYANAND, B.R.NANJUNDAIAH, D.R.BASAVARAJU, R.B.SADASHIVAPPA, S.G.BHATT
Applications under O. 22, R. 9, C. P. C. and S. 5 of the Limitation Act should be considered and disposed of on their merits.
Headnote:
Limitation Act - Bringing Legal Representatives on Record - R. 30 and 35 of the Karnataka Rent Control Rules - The court discussed the inconsistency between the provisions of R. 30 of the Rules and O. 22, Rr. 4 and 9, C. P. C. and the applicability of the Limitation Act. The court concluded that applications under O. 22, R. 9, C. P. C. and S. 5 of the Limitation Act should be considered and disposed of on their merits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed applications for bringing the legal representatives of deceased landlords on record, setting aside the abatement, and condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement. The trial court rejected the applications based on a previous decision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the trial court's reasoning was based on a previous decision that did not consider the inconsistency between the provisions of R. 30 of the Rules and O. 22, Rr. 4 and 9, C. P. C. The court concluded that the impugned orders passed by the trial court cannot be sustained and remitted the matters to the trial court for hearing and disposal on merits.
Issues: The issues involved the rejection of applications for bringing legal representatives on record, setting aside the abatement, and condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement based on a previous decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that applications under O. 22, R. 9, C. P. C. and S. 5 of the Limitation Act should be considered and disposed of on their merits, and the impugned orders passed by the trial court cannot be sustained.
Final Decision: The petitions were allowed, the orders in all the revision petitions were set aside, and the matters were remitted to the trial court for hearing and disposal on merits.
( 1 ) THESE petitions have been placed before this Division Bench for disposal, on an order of reference made by Malimath, Ag. C. J. (as he then was), being of opinion, that an important question of law arises.
( 2 ) THE petitioners in all these petitions are the same persons, while the respondents are different persons. These petitioners and three others who are their brothers, filed HRC No. 1551 of 1977 New No. 1183 of 1980, HRC No. 1545 of 1977 New No. 1110 of 1980, HRC No. 1515 of 1977 New No. 1096 of 1980, HRC No. 1541 of 1977 New No, 1107 of 1980, H. R. C. No. 1517 of 1977 New No. 1098 of 1980, H. R. C. No. 1509 of 1977 New No. 1092 of 1980, H. R. C. No. 1499 of 1977 New No. 1089 of 1980, HRC No. 1547 of 1977 New No. 1111 of 1980. HRC No. 1513 of 1977 New No. 1094 of 1980. HRC No. 1543 of 1977 New No. 1108 of 1980, H. R. C. 1497 of 1977 New No. 1109 of 1980 and H. R. C. No. 1505 of 1977 New No. 1091 of 1980, against the respondents in these civil revision petitions respectively. The said three persons were the brothers of the petitioners. They were petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 5 in all the said H. R. C. applications.
( 3 ) THE undisputed facts are that during the pendency of the applications in the Court of the XV Additional Small Cause Judge, Bangalore, three landlords namely, petitioners 2, 3 and 5 in the trial court expired. Three applications - one for bringing the legal representatives of the three deceased landlords on record, under O. 22 R. 3 C. P. C. another application under O. 22, R. 9, C. P. C. for setting aside the abatement, consequent to the death of the three landlords, and another application under S. 5 of the Limitation Act, requesting the Court to condone the delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement order -came to be filed in each of these H. R. C. cases. Those I. As. are given different numbers in different cases. Clarification of that is not, in our opinion, necessary for purpose of this order. The trial court passed its order on 18-2-1982. It rejected the applications by simply following the decision of this Court in Allamma v. Balagel Basappa (CRP No. 1982 of 1968, disposed of on 15-7-1969 ). It has to be stated here that the contents of all the orders in all these H. R. C. cases are almost same. The trial court has simply referred to the decision in that case and proceeded to dismiss the said cases. No other reasoning is found in the impugned orders.
( 4 ) THIS takes us to the reasoning in the order passed by this Court in Allamma's case.
( 5 ) THE facts in the said case were that the respondent in a H. R. C. application had died on 5-3-1968, pending proceedings in the trial court. Application to bring his legal representatives on record was filed on 24-9-1968 i. e. 6 months 19 days after the death. Other applications for setting aside the abatement and also for condonation of delay in filing the application for setting aside the abatement had also been filed. This Court referred to the provisions in Rr. 30 and 35 of the Karnataka Rent Control Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and held, that as R. 30 had expressly provided the period of limitation to bring the legal representatives of a deceased person to be 15 days, as against 90 days, available in Art, 120 of the Limitation Act, when an application is filed under O. 22, Rr. 4 and 9, C. P. C. , those would be inconsistent with the provisions of the special Statute, namely R. 30 of the Rules. His Lordship has excerpted Rr. 30 and 35 of the Rules. R. 35 reads as follows :"the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code to be generally followed :- In deciding any question relating to procedure not specifically provided by these Rules, the Court shall as far as possible be guided by the provisions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908". Rule 30 reads thus :"applications for making legal representatives of deceased persons parties to Proceedings under the Act.- Applications by or against legal representati
