Jagadisan, J.

This is an appeal by the Union of India represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Madras, against the judgment and decree in O.S. No. 10 of 1956 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirappalli whereby the Union of India, the defendant in the suit, was directed to pay the plaintiff the sum of Rs. 11, 115 with interest thereon at 6 per cent from 18 January, 1954, the date of the plaint together with costs amounting to Rs. 1, 799-4-0.

R. Akbar Sheriff, the plaintiff in the suit, presented the plaint on 18 January 1954 on the Original Side of this Court and it was transferred to the City Civil Court, Madras, on 22 July, 1955 for trial. Before the City Civil Court, the Union of India, the defendant in the suit, raised a preliminary issue that that Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit. By order, dated 12 October, 1955, the City Civil Court held that it had no jurisdiction and returned the plaint for presentation to the proper court. The plaintiff received the plaint by registered post on 8 December 1955 at Mathurai and re-presented the plaint on 12 December 1955, before the Sub-Court of Tiruchirappalli.

The plaintiff was employed as the permanent way inspector in the Southern Railway and was dismissed from service as and from 1 April, 1949. The order of dismissal of the plaintiff from service was because of the plaintiff's conviction of offences under Ss. 420 and 477A, Indian Penal Code, by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Mangalore. This conviction was set aside by an order of acquittal passed by this Court in Crl. R.C. No. 1442 of 1949, dated 25 January, 1951. The plaintiff was thereupon reinstated in service on and from 13 July, 1951. The present suit was filed for recovery of salary and allowance due to the plaintiff from 1 April, 1949 to 13 July, 1951 which aggregated to the sum of Rs. 11, 115 as the Union of India refused to pay such salary and allowance despite the order of reinstatement in service. The Union of India defended the suit and contended that the plaintiff had no right to claim the arrears of salary and allowance in a court of law, that such payment depended entirely on its discretion, and that in any event the suit claim was barred by limitation. The learned Subordinate Judge of Tiruchirappalli who tried the suit overruled the defence put forward by the Union of India and granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff as prayed for with costs. This appeal has, therefore, been preferred by the Union of India challenging the correctness and legality of that judgment and decree.The events that preceded the suit lie in a short compass and may therefore be set out before dealing with the points in controversy arising for determination in this appeal. The plaintiff was entertained in service by the Southern Railway on 22 April, 1931. In the year 1946 he was employed as a permanent way inspector and was stationed at Mangalore. The plaintiff had some misunderstandings with one G. C. Raman, permanent way sub-inspector and another Govindan, fitter, both employed under the railway. According to the plaintiff these two persons were responsible for filing false complaints against him to the section officer attached to the Special Police Establishment at Podanur. A chargesheet was filed against the plaintiff before the Subdivisional magistrate, Mangalore, in R.C. Nos. 1 and 2 of 1947 charging the plaintiff with having committed offences under Ss. 420 and 477A, Indian Penal Code. The charge was that the plaintiff who was entrusted with the duty of replacing sleepers in the railway line near Mangalore carried out the work with the help of the gang coolies employed under the railway but made it appear as if he had employed casual labourers to do the job and created false entries of payments. The cases were committed for trial before the Assistant Session Judge of Mangalore and were taken up on his file as S.C. Nos. 11 and 12 of 1948. After the trial the plaintiff wa