Ramachandra Iyer, J.-

This is an application to excuse the delay in the presentation of an appeal against the order of the Estate, Abolition Tribunal, Vellore, in A.S. No. 216 of 1956. The appeal is filed under section 7 (1) of the Madras Estates Supplementary Act, 1956 (Act XXX of 1956), which shall hereafter be referred to as the Act. The order of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, which in turn set aside the order of the Settlement Officer IV, Tiruchirapalli, held that Inam Kudimeri was not an inam estate within section 2 (7) of the Abolition Act (XXVI of 1948), and that was passed on 15th May, 1957. Madras Act XXX of 1956 came into force on 3rd August, 1957. Under section 7 of the Act, read with section 11, a right of appeal is provided against the decisions of the Estate Abolition Tribunal to the Special Appellate Tribunal. Prior to the Act, there was no appeal against such orders. The petitioner, evidently oblivious of the right conferred, applied to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in W.P. No. 725 of 1955 to call for records in A.S. No. 216 of 1956, on the file of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Vellore, and to quash the order of the Tribunal therein. The Writ Petition was filed on 9th August, 1959. it came up for hearing on 7th August, 1959. An objection appears to have been taken to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner had an effective remedy by way of an appeal. The petitioner, thereupon, took time to consider the position, and, under a mistaken impression that the proper remedy was to file an application to the concerned Tribunal under section 3, filed an application on nth August, 1959 with the Tribunal. Shortly thereafter, that is, 21st August, 1959, the writ petition was withdrawn and dismissed. The petitioner later realised that an application under section 3 was not the proper way of contesting the order, and that the appropriate remedy was an appeal to the Special Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner filed one on 13th October, 1959. Computing the time from the date of the order of the Estate Abolition Tribunal, there has been a delay of nearly 2 years and 3 months. Under section 7 of the Act, any person aggrieved by a decision of a Tribunal could file an appeal to the Special Appellate Tribunal consisting of two Judges of the High Court, nominated from time to time by the Chief Justice in that behalf, within a period of two months from the date of the decision. The Special Appellate Tribunal may, in its discretion, allow further time not exceeding three months for filing such an appeal. The effect of the various provisions of the Act is that the decision rendered by the Estates Abolition Tribunal on 15th May, 1957, will be deemed to be one given by a Tribunal constituted under the Act, and the party concerned will have a right of appeal under section 7 (1).

Prima facie, however, the appeal is barred by limitation, as it was not presented within two months of the date of the order of the Tribunal; indeed, it could not be filed within that time as the Act had not come into force by then. Nor was it filed within three months thereafter, within which time there is a discretion vested in the Court to excuse the delay in presentation. To get over the difficulty, the learned counsel for the petitioner invokes the aid of the principle embodied in section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act; he contends that the petitioner was prosecuting with due diligence and bona fide W.P. No. 725 of 1957 in this Court, from 9th August, 1957 to 21st August, 1959, for obtaining the relief sought in the appeal. If the petitioner is held entitled to the deduction of the time spent in the prosecution of W.P. No. 725 of 1957, being filed within 5 months of the impugned order, the further time taken for the application under section 3 was also claimed to be spent bona fide. That question does not arise except for the purpose of exercising this Court’s discretion.

Section 7 of the Act limits the time,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document