Applicability of the provisions of Section 45-O of the Act.

The facts which have led up to these two appeals against the judgment of Ramaswami Goundar, J., in Applications Nos. 3369 of 1952 and 3953 of 1953 are the following. The Hanuman Bank Ltd., Tanjore, went into liquidation. The petition for winding up was filed on 17th August, 1947 and it was directed to be wound up on 5th November, 1947. The Official Liquidators who were appointed by this Court in the winding up petition filed a suit, O.S. No. 18 of 1949, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Kumbakonam against one Mohammedsa Rowther for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 12,620-7-0 by sale of properties hypothecated to the bank under a mortgage bond, dated 29th September, 1943 and another deed, dated, 14th March, 1944, under which the same properties were offered as security for additional amounts. The suit was filed some time in April, 1949. There was written statement by the defendant denying liability and issues were framed on 12th July, 1949. When the suit was pending the Banking Companies Act, 1949, was passed and came into force on 16th March, 1949. Before this Act there was a Governor-General’s Ordinance, XXIII of 1949, and under the provisions of that Ordinance there was an application to this Court to direct the defendant in the suit to pay the Official Liquidators a sum of Rs. 15,130-13-1 with further interest and praying in default of payment the properties hypothecated may be sold. The suit was transferred to the company side of this Court. The defendant died on 29th November, 1951. When the application filed by the Official Liquidators above mentioned came on for orders before the learned Master on 6th November, 1952, it was reported that the respondent to the application, that is, the defendant in the suit, was dead. Adjournments were taken from time to time and eventually on 21st January, 1953, an application, No. 637 of 1953 was filed to bring on record the legal representatives of the deceased-respondent and to set aside the abatement. There was no application as such for the delay to be excused. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the Official Liquidators in support of the application the only allegation made was that the Official Liquidators were informed on enquiry that the respondent was dead leaving behind him certain legal representatives. It was therefore prayed that this Court may set aside the abatement caused by the death of Mohammedsa Rowther, that is, the respondent, and to bring on record five persons as the legal representatives of the said deceased Mohammedsa Rowther. The application was opposed. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the proposed legal representatives it was pointed out that there was absolutely no ground or sufficient cause for setting aside the abatement and that no grounds were even set forth in the application. Even the date of death had not been mentioned. In the reply affidavit on behalf of the Official Liquidators it was stated that the death of the respondent was not known to them until the notice sent to him by this Court was returned unserved and as soon as they got information they took steps to bring on record the legal representatives. They further stated that the delay in the circumstances was not due to wilful negligence or default on their part. The application for setting aside the abatement and for bringing on record the legal representatives of the respondent first came up before the learned Master who held that no sufficient cause had been shown for the delay in seeking to set aside the abatement within the period allowed under Article 171 of the Limitation Act. He therefore dismissed the application. There was an appeal from this order of the Master to the learned Judge sitting in Chambers (Application No. 3953 of 1953). The appeal came on for hearing before Ramaswami Goundar, J., along with the application to set aside the abatement. The learned Judge held that there had been long delay in filing the application to set aside the abatement