Back
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHBAD
DESAI, J.
Ram Singh
Versus
Panchayati Adalat
Criminal Misc. Writ No. 197 of 1953
Decided On : 11-11-1953
PANCHAYATI ADALAT - Revision - Limitation - Application under Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act - Whether governed by Article 181 of the Limitation Act - Whether time spent in obtaining a copy of the order sought to be revised can be excluded - Whether an application under Section 85 is an appeal within the meaning of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants were prosecuted by the opposite-party No. 3 for offences of Sections 426, 323 and 506, I.P.C. before the panchayati adalat. The panchayati adalat convicted them of the offences and fined them on 12-8-1952. On 15-9-1952 they applied for a copy of the order and on 31-10-1952 they applied to the Sub-divisional Magistrate under Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act for revision of the order. The Sub-divisional Magistrate dismissed the application on the ground that having been filed more than sixty days from the date of the order, it was barred by time.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the application under Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act is an appeal within the meaning of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act and the time spent in obtaining a copy of the order sought to be revised can be excluded. Therefore, the application was within time and should have been heard on merits by the Sub-divisional Magistrate.
Issues: 1. Whether an application under Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act is governed by Article 181 of the Limitation Act? 2. Whether the time spent in obtaining a copy of the order sought to be revised can be excluded? 3. Whether an application under Section 85 is an appeal within the meaning of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act prescribes a limitation of sixty days for making an application for revision of a panchayati adalat's order. This limitation is not for the making of an application by the aggrieved party but for the calling for the record of the case. 2. Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act provides that the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence, or order appealed from or sought to be reviewed shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal, an application for leave to appeal, and an application for a review of judgment. An application under Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act is an appeal within the meaning of Section 12(2) of the Limitation Act.
Final Decision: The Court issued a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate dated 15-4-1953 and directed him to restore the revision application to its original number and hear it on merits.
2. Their counsel has confined the application only to challenging the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate. The merits of the panchayati adalats order are not before me.
3. It is laid down in Section 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act that if there has been a miscarriage of justice or if there is an apprehension of miscarriage of justice in any case, the Sub-divisional Magistrate"may, on the application of any party or on his own motion, at any time in a pending case ....... and within sixty clays from the date of ...... order, call for the record of the case and may..... .quash any..... .order passed by the panchayati adalat."
The limitation prescribed under this provision is not for the making of an application by the aggrieved party but for the calling for the record of the case. The law is that the record must be called for within sixty days from the date of the order and not that an application for revision must be made within that period. I do not know why the Legislature prescribed the period of limitation not for the doing of an act by a party but for the doing of an act by the Court. If it be said that no period of limitation is prescribed by the Legislature for an application under S. 85 of the Act, the limitation would be governed by the residuary Article 181 of the Limitation Act. This article does not govern an application for revision under the Codes of Criminal and Civil Procedure but it does not follow that it would not govern an application for revision under S. 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act also. This revision is different from the revision filed under the Codes.
Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not mention any applications to be made for the exercise of revisional powers; they simply provide for the summoning of the record by the Courts of revision. As they deal only with the summoning of the records by the Courts of revision, there does not arise any question of a period of limitation for making an application for revision. But S. 85 of the Panchayat Raj Act specifically refers to an application to the Sub-divisional Magistrate for the exercise of his revisional powers and therefore it must be governed by some limitation. It is clear that if the record itself has to be summoned within sixty days, the application must of necessity be made within sixty days. If it is made after sixty days, it would be dismissed if not on the ground that it is barred by time, at least on the ground that the record cannot be summoned. It is evident that Article 181 of the Limitation Act is not intended to govern such an application.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
