BHANU PRAKASH AJIT KUMAR Vs. VIDYA BHUSHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS matter relates to a plot of land measuring 50 feet x 50 feet on Grand Trunk Road at Khatauli. The plaintiff-respondent became the owner of the land on a partition in their family. The second defendant- appellant had taken the land on a 20 years' lease on payment of Rs. 50/- per month as rent. The lease expired on 3ist May 1972. The plaintiff instituted the suit giving rise to the present second appeal for the eviction of the defendant appellant on the determination of the lease and for arrears of rent and damages. The suit was decreed by the trial Court for eviction, arrears of rent and damages on 18th February 1977, and the first appeal there from was dismissed by the lower appellate Court on 9th November 1977. In this second appeal, an application dated 6th February, 1978, was presented along with the appeal on the 8th February, 1978 for relief under Section 29-A (6) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 as amended by U. P. Act No. 23 of 1976-. The Amend ment Act came into force on the 5th July 1976, and under sub-section (6) of Section 29-A an application for relief under that provision must be made within three months from the commencement of that section i. e. within three months from 5th July 1976. The application dated 6th February 1978 was made on 8th February 1976. The application was accompanied by another application praying for condonation of the delay in making the application under Section 29-A (6) on the ground that the appellants were ignorant of the provision of Section 29-A of the Act when the same was introduced. That may or may not constitute sufficient cause for the delay, but for reasons given by me in my order of date on a similar application in second appeal No. 1253 of 1977 (District Agra) (Jawali and others v. Pandit Sri Niwas Dixit and others), I am of the opinion that the time limited by the provision of sub-section (6) of Section 29-A cannot be extended under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963, or any other provision of law, and a party, if it wants to take advantage of the provision of Section 29-A of the Act in a pending proceeding, must apply within the three months time prescribed thereby. If an application is not made in a pending proceeding within three months of 5th July 1976, the provisions of Section 29-A are not attracted to that pending proceeding. The result is that the only ground on which this appeal appears to have been admitted at the hearing under order XLI Rules 11, Code of Civil Procedure is not available to the appellants. Further, although the appeal was admitted after hearing under order XLI Rule 11, Code of Civil Pro cedure, on the 8th February 1978, after the amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure by Act No. 104 of 1976, the substantial question of law involved the case, if any, has not been formulated in the memorandum of appeal as required by sub-section (3) of Section 100 of the Amended Code of Civil Procedure, nor did the learned Judge who admitted the appeal after hearing under Or. XLI Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure formulated any such question of law it appears that the appeal does not involve any substantial question of law. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.