R T CHINNAVENKATESH Vs. SENIOR RTO MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions the question that arises for consideration is whether S.5 of the Limitation Act is applicable to appeals filed under S.15 of the Karnaaka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957. The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Mysore, dismissed two appeals filed by the petitioners in these two petitions on the ground that they were barred by time. One of the contentions raised in these two writ petitions is that the petitioners had made applications under S.5 of the Limitation Act before the Deputy Transport Commr to condone the delay in filing the appeal and that in not taking them into consideration, he had failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him.

(2.) On behalf of the respondents it is urged that S.5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable to the appeals in question. The Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and the Rules framed thereunder do not expressly prqvide that S.5 of the Limitation Act would be applicable to the appeals filed under S.15. Sri R.J.Babu, learned Counsel for the petitioners, contended that the principle underlying S.5 of the Limitation Act should have been applied by the Deputy Transport Commr by virtue of sub-sec (2) of S.29 of the Limitation Act. I find it difficult to agree with the submission made on behalf of the petitioners.

(3.) The Deputy Transport Commr is not a Court. The appeals in question arose under a taxing statute. S.29 (2) of the Limitation Act does not say that the provisions of the Limitation Act would be applicable to appeals filed under a taxing statute. In the above situation it is not possible to apply by analogy the principles underlying S.5 of the Limitation Act to appeals filed under the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act.