PURAN CHAND Vs. ABDULLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the Small Cause Court Judge of Saharanpur of the following point for the decision of this Court: Whether an endorsement; of payment made at the back of a pro-note more than three years after its execution but during the close holidays of the Civil Courts which had begun prior to the completion of three years period gives a fresh start of limitation under Section 20 read with Section 4, Limitation Act?

(2.) The reference was laid before a Bench of two Judges and those Judges decided on 9 August 1937 that there were conflicting rulings on the point: Accordingly we direct that this case be laid before the Hon ble the Chief Justice with the request that he be pleased to constitute such a Bench (a larger Bench) for the decision of the question involved in the reference.

(3.) Under the High Court Rules Ch. 1, Rule 3-A, a Bench was constituted of three Judges by order of 6 September 1937. Before that Bench assembled, a similar point of limitation had been the subject of a decision by a Full Bench which isreported in Shanker Lal V/s. Rana Lal Singh . This decision was made on 5 January 1938, and reported in February. The learned Judges who constituted the Full Bench in the present case made a brief order on 25 April 1938. They stated that there was a difference of opinion and that opposite views had been expressed by a Full Bench of Madras and by a Full Bench of the Lahore High Courts, and there had recently been a decision by a Full Bench of this Court that is in consonance with the view taken by the Lahore High Court: It is not unlikely that there may be difference of opinion even amongst the Judges constituting this Bench Accordingly we consider that it is desirable that the present reference be decided by a Full Bench of five Judges. We therefore direct that the case be put before the Hon ble the Chief Justice with the request that be may be pleased to constitute a Full Bench of five Judges.