SAMANTHAPUDI SURANNAMUKHI Vs. SAMANTHAPUDI VIRUPAKSHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question that falls for determination in this Civil Revision Petition is whether the petitioner-plaintiff has a right to sue on the date of the institution of the suit.

(2.) The petitioner-plaintiff filed a Small Cause suit No. 362 of 1965 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 700.00 and odd being half the share payable to him by defendant in the suit. It was her case that she and the defendant were co-judgment-debtors in O. S. 88 of 1961 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kavali, in which a joint and several decree was passed against them. In the execution of the decree in E. P. 230 of 1962, the plaintiffs property was brought to sale and she was compelled to pay the entire amount totalling Rs. 1400 and odd in full satisfaction of the decretal amount. She, therefore, brought a suit for contribution against the co-judgment-debtor, the defendant, on 24-9-1965. Unfortunately for her she was adjudged insolvent on 1-8-1964 i.e., nearly one year prior to the filing of the suit. She then filed a petition under Order 1 Rule 10 C. P. C. for impleading the official receiver as defendant in the suit. This petition was resisted by the respondent-defendant on the ground that it was barred by limitation and that the plaintiff had no locus standi to institute the suit. The learned Subordinate Judge, Kavali, on a consideration of the arguments advanced before him, held that the present petition was not within time and, therefore, dismissed the I. A. and consequently dismissed the suit also on the same day. The revision is filed against this order.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N. Subba Reddy contends that the lower Court did not consider the provisions of the new limitation Act which provides that