LAWS(MAD)-2006-10-116

A R RAJAGOPAL Vs. ARULMIGHU THIRUMANGALEESWARAR TEMPLE

Decided On October 18, 2006
A.R. RAJAGOPAL Appellant
V/S
ARULMIGHU THIRUMANGALEESWARAR TEMPLE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceedings in C.M.A.(Inam Appeal) No:112 of 2005, on the file o the Minor Inams Tribunal, II Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, since the said Tribunal exceeded in entertaining the said Appeal which was alleged as hopelessly barred by limitation and hit by other legal bars as well.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are as follows:-

(3.) UNDER sub Section (3) of Section 11 of the Minor Inams Act. to file an appeal before the Inam Tribunal, the limitation period is one year for the Government and for any other person it is three months. However, the Tribunal by using its discretion can extent the further time by two months. As per the letter sent by the Commissioner of HR & CE, the Government was aware of the grant of patta and subsequent sale in favour of M/s. Sri Krishna Tiles and Potteries (Madras) Pvt., Ltd., at least from 3.2.2003 as seen from his letters sent to various authorities like Corporation, CMDA, Sub Registrar etc., So from 3.2.2003, the appeal should have been filed on or before 2.5.2003 i.e., within three months. Even if the court gives further time of two months on the application for condonation of delay, the Tribunal can at the maximum grant two months as per Sub Section (3) of Section 11 of the Minor Inams Act. Therefore, the appeal should have been filed on or before 2.7.2003. But the appeal was actually filed only on 29.10.2003 and even without an application to condone the delay the Tribunal has taken up the appeal on file. Therefore the Inam Appeal itself has been barred by limitation even assuming 3.2.2003 as the date of knowledge of the Government. IN fact notice has been given to the Tahsildar, Saidapet Taluk before passing an order on 10.10.1966 and actually, the limitation starts from 10.10.1966. Thus, the Inam Appeal preferred by the first respondent-temple is hopelessly barred by limitation.