The Limitation Act, 1963 applies to proceedings under the Bengal Co-operative Societies Act, unless expressly excluded.

1. This Rule is directed against order dated 20-7-1972 passed by the Assistant Registrar of Co - operative Societies, 24 - Parganas (North) as the Co - operative Tribunal rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the ground of limitation. It appears that there were certain disputes between the petitioner and others and the co - operative bank and an award was passed by a Board of Arbitrators in dispute case No. 342 of 1969-70 in respect of the said dispute. The award was made on 11-12-1971 and was communicated to the petitioner on 21-12-1971. The appeal petition against the award was filed on 16-2-1972. The appellate authority, the Co - operative Tribunal, was of the opinion that under S. 134 of the Bengal Co - operative Societies Act, 1940 read with the Fourth schedule thereof an appeal was to be filed within a month from the date of communication of the award to the person aggrieved. As this appeal was filed out of time beyond one month from date of communication, it was barred by limitation and was summarily rejected. This Rule is against this order. After the dismissal of the appeal, the petitioner filed a review petition against the order to the Government of West Bengal and the same was also rejected on March 30/31, 1973 by the Deputy Secretary, Co - operative Department of the Government. Both these orders are the subject - matter of the challenge in this Rule.

2. Mr. Sinha appearing for the petitioner submitted that the appellate authority was in error in dismissing the application on the ground of limitation as the petitioner had applied for certified copy of the reasons of the award on 27-12-1971 and the copies were available to him on 24-1-1972. Accordingly, the petitioner was entitled to an exclusion of the time so taken under provision of S. 12 (2) of the Lim. Act, 1963. There is no dispute that if the time for copy is taken into account, the appeal would be in time.

3. The first consideration is whether the provisions of Lim. Act, 1963 apply to proceedings before tribunals under the Act. Mr. Mitter appearing for the cooperative bank has referred to various decisions in support of his contention that the provisions of Lim. Act have no application to the proceeding under the Bengal Co - operative Societies Act. He has referred to the decision in K. Venkateswara Rao v. Bekkam Narasimha Reddy reported in AIR 1969 SC 872 in which the court held that the Lim. Act cannot apply to proceedings like an election petition in the High Court inasmuch as the Representation of the People Act is a complete and self contained Code which does not admit of the introduction of the principles or the provisions of law contained in the Lim. Act. Lim. Act, 1963 states in its preamble that the Act is for consolidation and amendment of the law of limitation of suits and other proceedings and for other purposes connected therewith. S.29 (2) of the Act is in the following terms:
"Where any special or local law prescribes for any suit appeal or application a period of limitation different from the period prescribed by the Schedule, the provisions of S. 3 shall apply as if such period were the period prescribed by the Schedule and for the purpose of determining any period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by any special or local law, the provisions contained in S.4 to 24 (inclusive) shall apply only in so far as, and to the extent to which, they are not expressly excluded by such special or local law."

4. On perusal, the section would indicate that where a provision of the period of limitation prescribed in any special or local law was different from the period under the Lim. Act, such period shall be deemed to be the provision for the purpose of limitation as if such period wa