AGATHEESWARAR AND PRASANNA VENKATESA PERUMAL DEVASTHANAM BY ITS HEREDITARY TRUSTEE R. VALLIAMMAL Vs. VARADA REDDY AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two civil revision petitions have been preferred against the common judgment of the learned Chief Judge (Appellate Authority), Court of Small Causes at Madras, dismissing the ejectment appeals filed before him and granting a further period of thirty -six months from the date of his order, viz., 30th April, 1975, for payment of the compensation due to the landlord fixed by the trial Court. By a judgment, dated 17th July, 1972, the trial Court which directed the landlord to sell the sites in the occupation of the tenants to the latter at the rate of Rs. 10,000 per ground, further permitted the tenants to pay the value in three years, spread in equal monthly instalments, with interest thereon. This period of three years would have come to an end on 16th July, 1975. However, the learned Chief Judge of the Court of Small Causes, who heard the appeals preferred against the common judgment passed by the learned Second Judge of Court of Small Causes as trial Judge, extended the time for payment by a further period of three years from 30th April, 1975, viz., the date on which he delivered the judgment. Though the word extended is not used by the appellate Judge, the effect of his order granting a further period of three years from the date of the judgment is to extend the time granted by the trial Court.

(2.) The question to be considered in these revision petitions is whether, the Appellate Court had the jurisdiction to extend the time for payment beyond the period of three years from the date of the order of the trial Court which it confirmed. I am of the opinion that it cannot.

(3.) Sec. 9(1)(b) of the Madras City Tenants, Protection Act lays down: