The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and applicability of Section 225 of the Madras Local Boards Act, 1920, which is limited to suits for compensation or damages.

Alfred Henry Lionel Leach, C.J.

1. In 1931 the village of Ernavur was added to the jurisdiction of the Panchayat Board of Thiruvothiyur. The respondent company has a match factory in Ernavur and when the village came within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat Board the factory buildings were assessed to house-tax the amount of the tax collected being Rs. 2,588-8-3. The respondent company challenged the validity of the action of the Panchayat Board and filed a suit in the Court of the District Munsif of Poonamallee to recover what it had been compelled to pay. The District Munsif held that the tax had been illegally levied and rejected the contention of the Panchayat Board that the suit did not lie because it had not been filed within the period allowed by Section 225 of the Madras Local Boards Act, 1920, as amended by Act XI of 1930. The District Munsif considered that the period of limitation imposed by that section only applied to suits for compensation or damages. The Subordinate Judge of Chingleput upheld the decision of the District Munsif on both points on appeal. The Panchayat Board then filed a second appeal to this Court. The appeal was heard by Burn and Lakshmana Rao, JJ., who agreed that the levy was illegal, but referred to a Full Bench the question whether Section 225 of the Madras Local Boards Act, 1920, is confined to suits for compensation or damages. This Bench has been constituted to decide the question.

2. A long series of decisions, with one exception, support the decisions of the lower Courts on the question of the applicability of Section 225. I shall refer to certain of these decisions presently, but before doing so it is necessary to set out the history of the section and that of the corresponding section in the Madras District Municipalities Act, 1920. Most of the decisions have been under earlier Acts. The first Act relating to Local Boards was the Madras Local Boards Act, 1884, in which Section 156 was the corresponding section to Section 225 of the present Act. Section 156 of the Act of 1884 read as follows:

No action shall be brought against any Local Board, or any of their officers, or any person acting under their direction, for anything done or purporting to be done under this Act until the expiration of one month next after notice in writing shall have been delivered or left at the office of the Local Board, or at any place of abode of such person, explicitly stating the cause of action, and the name and place of abode of the intended plaintiff and unless such notice be proved, the Court shall find for the defendant, and every such action shall be commenced within six months next after the accrual of the cause of action, and not afterwards; and if any person to whom any such notice of action is given shall, before action brought, tender sufficient amends to the plaintiff, such plaintiff shall not recover more than the amount so tendered, and shall pay all costs incurred by the defendant after such tender.

3. The Act of 1884 was amended by Act VI of 1900 and Section 156 was amended to read as follows:

(1) No action shall be brought against any Local Board or Panchayat or against any member or servant of such board or panchayat or against any person acting under the directions of such local board or panchayat or of a member or servant of such board or panchayat, on account of any act done, or purporting to be done, in pursuance or execution or intended execution of this Act, or in respect of any alleged neglect or default in the execution of this Act until the expiration of one month next after notice in writing shall have been delivered or left either at the office of the Local Board or Panchayat or at the place of abode of such member or servant or of such person, explicitly stating the cause of action, the nature of the relief sought, the amount of compensation claimed and the name and place of abode of the intended plaintiff; and unless such notice be proved to have been so delivered or left