SUBODH SARDAR Vs. SOUL CHANDRA NASKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner complains of the District Judge declining an application under sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 on the ground that the petitioner had not been diligent in pursuing the petitioner's remedy in accordance with law. The petitioner sought to challenge an order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) on an appeal arising under section 14H of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 before this court by way of a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner withdrew such petition before this court upon pointing out that there was an alternative remedy available under the first proviso to section 14H of the said Act that allowed a revision to be carried from the order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) to a District Judge within 60 days from the date of the order.

(2.) The order of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) was passed on May 31, 2010. The certified copy of such order was obtained on June 7, 2010. The petition under Article 227 of the Constitution was filed in February, 2011 and it was withdrawn with leave on August 8, 2012. The revision was lodged before the District Judge on September 21, 2012.

(3.) The opposite parties are represented upon notice and say that Section 14 of the 1963 Act excludes the time spent in proceeding bona fide in a court without jurisdiction. The opposite parties suggest that since a period in excess of eight months had been wasted by the petitioner prior to approaching this court under Article 227 of the Constitution, the period of limitation had expired even before the petition was filed in this court and there was no question of the period spent in this court to be considered under section 14 of the 1963 Act.