Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 121 (HP)

SUBASH CHAND v. PURAN CHAND

2003-05-25

K.C.SOOD

body2003
JUDGMENT Kuldip Chand Sood, J. (Oral) - The present petition rises out of the judgment of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra, District Kangra, dated 15th March, 2000. 2. It appears, on a complaint made by respondent No. 1 Puran i Chand, proceedings under Section 228, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code were initiated by the Gram Panchayat, Dhaliara in Tehsil Dehra of District Kangra against petitioner Subhash Chand and respondent No- 2-Vijay Kumar. The Panchayat convicted and sentenced them to pay a fine of Rs.21- each vide its order dated 26th February, 1999. 3. Aggrieved, both the petitioner and respondent No. 2 carried an appeal before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehra. The appeal was dismissed being bared by the period of limitation. 4. It is noticed that the appeal was filed under Section 67 of the HP. Panchayati Raj Act, "1994, hereinafter referred to as the Act. Perusal of this provision shows that an appeal against an order of the Panchayat is contemplated to be filed within 30 days from the date of j order to the Judicial Magistrate/Sub Judge in respect of any case or any suit as the case may be and the Collector concerned in respect of 1 any proceedings under the H.P. Land Revenue Act, 1983. In the present case the appeal was to lay before the Judicial Magistrate, Dehra. As the order was passed on 26th February, 1999, therefore, the appeal was to be filed on or before 26th March, 1999. However, this appeal was filed on 15th May, 1999. The appeal was not accompanied by any application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for the condonation of the delay. 5. An argument was raised before the learned Magistrate that the limitation, provided under Section 67 of the Act, is to be counted from the date the appellant came to know about the order passed by the Panchayat. The order was passed ex parte on 26th February, 1999 and the appellant came to know about the passing of the order only on 15th April, 1999. 6. Learned trial Magistrate rightly took a view that the limitation, for the filing of the appeal under Section 67 of the Act, shall start running from the date of the order and not from the date of the knowledge. If the order was ex parte and the appellant was not aware! 6. Learned trial Magistrate rightly took a view that the limitation, for the filing of the appeal under Section 67 of the Act, shall start running from the date of the order and not from the date of the knowledge. If the order was ex parte and the appellant was not aware! of such an order then he could have claimed condonation of delay Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act which was not done. 7. Even if plea of the appellant is taken at its face value, though this is not the position under law, the petitioner, admittedly, was supplied copy of the order by Panchayat on 11th April, 1999, therefore, the period of limitation of 30 days expired on 10th May, 1999 Whereas the appeal was filed, before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, on 15th May, 1999, which indeed was beyond the period of limitation. 8. I see no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.