GUNEPALLY THAMMAYYA Vs. SRI RAJAH TYADAPUSAPATI KHANDENDU DHORA SRI VISWANADHA MALLAPURAJ DAKSHINAKAVAT DUGARAJ BAHADUR GARU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These second appeals have been referred to me by My Lord the Chief Justice on account of the difference of opinion between my brothers Anantakrishna Aiyar and Curgenven, JJ., who first heard them. They are filed under the Agency Rules applying to the Scheduled Districts.

(2.) The Zamindar of Pachipenta filed suits for rents under Section 77 of the Madras Estates Land Act against his ryots and they were decreed by the Assistant Agent. The ryots filed appeals to the Agent to the Governor at Vizagapatam. These appeals were filed more than thirty days but within six weeks after the decrees. The time prescribed for appealing against a decree for rent to the District Collector is thirty days under Section 191 of the Madras Estates Land Act, and six weeks under Rule 56 of the Agency Rules. The Collector dismissed the appeals on the ground that they were barred by limitation applying Section 191 of the Madras Estates Land Act. The ryots filed these second appeals against those decrees. The question is which rule ought to be applied.

(3.) The first point argued by the learned Advocate for the respondent is that Rule 56 of the Agency Rules does not apply at all to appeals under the Estates Land Act, and only Section 191 of the Act applies, and there is no question of conflict between the two sections. This argument does not seem to have been addressed before the learned Judges, or any rate, if it was, they apparently have not agreed with this contention. The contention is based on the fact that Rule 1 defines the powers of the Agents and Assistant Agents followed by the heading "Civil Justice" which is the heading of the rules from Rule 2 onwards. The learned Advocate contends that "Civil Justice" excludes judicial matters in Revenue Courts, that is, he takes the words "Civil Justice" in a narrow sense, namely administration of justice before ordinary civil courts of the land, such as the District Munsif, Subordinate Judge, District Judge and the High Court and Courts corresponding to them. But of course the word "Civil" has two senses--the narrow sense contended for by the Advocate and a larger sense, that is, as opposed to criminal only. In the Agency Rules of 1860, which were superseded by the present Agency Rules which were passed in 1924, the first six rules related to criminal justice and from Rule 7 onwards they related to civil justice including Revenue Courts (vide Rule 10). When the Criminal Procedure Code of 1862 was passed the first six rules were repealed as the Code applied to the Agency tracts. But the rules from Rule 7 onwards remained in force up to 1924, when they were superseded by the present rule; and a perusal of the present rules show that they were based on the former rules from Rule 7 onwards. This comparison leads one to the view that the heading "Civil Justice" is used in the larger sense.