1. The Electricity O.P. filed by the revision petitioner before the lower court was dismissed on the ground of limitation. His petition to condone the delay was dismissed on the ground that the court exercising jurisdiction under S.16(3) of the Indian Telegraph Act has no jurisdiction to consider an application under S.5 of the Limitation Act. The court also held that there were no sufficient grounds for condoning the delay.

2. This Court in K.S.E.B. v. Cheriyan Varghese (1989(1) K.L.T. 451) held that the order of the District Court under S.16(3) of the Telegraph Act is revisable under S.115 C.P.C. for the reason that the order is that of a "Court".

3. In State of Kerala v. Syamala Thamburatti (1980 KLT 34 F.B.) a Full Bench of this Court held that if there is no provision which excludes any of the provisions in S.4 to 24 of the Limitation Act, those sections will be applicable to the extent to which those provisions have not been expressly excluded by a special or local law. This is also the gist of S.29(2) of the Limitation Act.

4. No authority was relied on for the contention that proceedings underS.16(3) of the Telegraph Act is similar to a suit. According to the Secti