A court cannot impose limitation periods for filing fresh suits after withdrawal; such authority lies with Parliament under the Limitation Act.

ORDER :

V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

This civil revision petition arises against the order of the learned Principal District Judge at Krishnagiri in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in unnumbered suit of 2023 (presently numbered as O.S.No.157 of 2024) dated 28.03.2024.

2. The civil revision petitioners are the defendants 1 and 2 to the suit. Between the very same parties, a suit had been presented in O.S.No.90 of 2016 before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate at Pochampalli. The said suit was sought to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Accordingly, an application in I.A.No.275 of 2017 was filed in O.S.No.90 of 2016. The said application was allowed by the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate on 28.11.2019. The learned District Munsif permitted the withdrawal of the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action on the condition that the plaintiffs pay the defendants a sum of Rs.2,500/-. The plaintiffs tendered the sum to the defendants but the defendants refused to accept the same. So the cost was deposited to the credit of the suit and consequently the application stood allowed.

3. Taking note of the fact that the conditional order passed by the learned District Munsif had been complied with by the plaintiffs, the learned District Munsif allowed I.A.No.275 of 2017 on 28.11.2019. Curiously enough, while granting liberty, the learned District Munsif passed the following order:

4. The plaintiffs thereafter presented the present suit before the Principal District Judge at Krishnagiri. At the time of filing the suit, they had taken out an application to condone the delay of 1138 days in filing the fresh suit on the same cause of action. This application was numbered as I.A.No.1 of 2023. Notice was issued in this application and the civil revision petitioners opposed the same. The learned Principal District Judge held as the plaintiffs had complied with the condition that had been imposed on them in I.A.No.275 of 2017, I.A.No.1 of 2023 has to be allowed. Hence, this revision.

5. Mr.R.Jayaprakash pleads that the fresh suit is barred by time and hence, the learned Judge ought not to have allowed the application. According to him, since the application seeking permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action came to be allowed on 28.11.2019, the suit should have been filed within three months from the said date. He adds that as the said three month period had expired, the present suit is not maintainable as it is hit by limitation.

6. I have carefully considered the submissions of Mr.Jayaprakash.

7. I have to begin the judgment recollecting the maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit - an act of a Court cannot prejudice any party. Under Order XXIII Rule 1(a) or (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court can permit the party to withdraw the suit and file a fresh suit on the same cause of action either if the suit suffers from a 'formal defect' or for any other sufficient cause. In this case, the learned District Munsif at Pochampalli found that the permission sought to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.90 of 2016 and present a fresh suit deserved consideration. Hence, he allowed the application. Yet, he had fixed an outer limit to file the suit. No Court has the power to fix or extend the period of limitation. That is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Parliament. In exercise of the powers vested in the Parliament, it has enacted the LIMITATION ACT . Neither the LIMITATION ACT nor the Code of Civil Procedure enables a Court to fix the time before which the suit can be presented. As to when a party wants to present a suit is ent