JAYACHAMARAJENDRA CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD Vs. MADAIAH AND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two revision petitions have been filed against the order of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Mysore in Execution cases, Nos. 840 and 1216 of 1947-48 on his file. Sri Jayachamarajendra Co-operative Society Ltd., Mysore, filed those applications on 10th November 1947 to recover amounts due to it under the decisions passed on 3rd December 1935 by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies in disputes Nos. 1314/34-35 and 754/33-34. The two previous execution applications made to the civil court, obviously on certificates by the Registrar before taking out execution proceedings in the civil Court, were dismissed in the year 1942. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the applications were barred by limitation. Hence these revision petitions.

(2.) The present execution applications are prima facie barred by limitation. Mr. Y. M. C. Sharma who appears for the decree-holder-Society contends that the applications are within time by virtue of Section 60, Mysore Co-operative Societies' Act LII [52] of 1948, as under Section 60, Sub-section (2), in any dispute or suit of the description mentioned in Sub-section (1) of Section 52, i. e. a dispute touching the business of a registered society, the periods of limitation applicable are now double those prescribed in the second column of Schedule 1 annexed to the Mysore Limitation Act, 1911. He argues that a "dispute or suit" includes an execution application and that therefore the period for making an execution application being now 6 years, the present execution applications are within time.

(3.) There can be no doubt that according to the decision in 17 Mis. L. J. 342 the present applications would be barred by limitation as having been brought more than 3 years from the date when the right to apply accrued, i. e. the date of the certificate of the Registrar under Section 43, (c) of Act VII [7] of 1918, the Mysore Co-operative Societies Act, corresponding to Section 53 of the present Act. It is, therefore, necessary to consider whether the present Co-operative Societies Act has made any difference in this matter. Section 60, Clause (1) provides that subject to the provisions of the next succeeding sub-sections of that section, the provisions of the Mysore Limitation Act of 1911 so far as they relate to suits, appeals and applications shall, so far as may be, apply to disputes, suits, appeals, or applications instituted, preferred or made under that Act. The difference in the wording of Section 60 Clause (1) and Clause (2) is very significant. Appeals and applications are omitted in Sub-clause (2). Execution and other applications would therefore be governed by Section 60, Clause (1) and not Clause (2). Even in Section 60, Clause (5) the saving provision is made applicable only to any dispute or suit for which the period of limitation prescribed by Section 60 has expired prior to the date of the commencement of the Act or expires within six months next after that date; and in the explanation to that section a dispute has been stated to be deemed to be a suit. The difference between disputes and suite and appeals and applications is therefore clearly evident throughout that section.