Case Note & Summary
The case arose from eviction proceedings under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965. The respondent-landlord filed Rent Control Petition No. 117 of 1992 before the Rent Control Court, Kannur, seeking eviction of the appellant-tenant on grounds of default in payment of rent and bona fide need for conducting a grocery shop for his son. The Rent Control Court passed an order for possession on 28 October 1993. The tenant applied for a certified copy the next day and received it on 23 November 1993. According to the tenant, he entrusted papers to his counsel on 4 December 1993, but suffered a paralytic attack on 5 December 1993 and remained bedridden until 27 December 1993. On 28 December 1993, he learned from counsel that the appeal period had elapsed. The appeal was filed on 31 December 1993 before the appellate authority, the District Judge, Thalassery, along with an application for condonation of delay. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal as time-barred on 11 January 1994, holding that as a persona designata it had no power to invoke Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Kerala High Court dismissed the tenant's civil revision petition following the majority decision in Jokkim Fernandez v. Amina Kunhi Umma (AIR 1974 Kerala 162). The tenant then appealed to the Supreme Court by special leave. The core legal issue was whether the appellate authority constituted under Section 18 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 has power to condone delay in filing an appeal under Section 29(2) read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The tenant argued that the majority view in Jokkim Fernandez was incorrect and that the appellate authority had full powers under Section 29(2) to consider condonation. The landlord supported the High Court's decision but, through counsel, fairly conceded that the appellate authority was not a persona designata. The Supreme Court noted that an authority is a persona designata only if powers are conferred on a named person and cannot be exercised by anyone else. Examining the statutory scheme, the Court observed that the appellate authority under Section 18(1) decides lis between parties in a judicial manner, and subject to revision, its decision remains final. This contra-indicates that it is a mere persona designata. The Court then proceeded to examine the applicability of Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act. The provided excerpt ends before the final operative order; however, the Court's reasoning indicates that the appellate authority's refusal to entertain the condonation application on the ground of being a persona designata was untenable.
Headnote
A) Rent Control - Condonation of Delay by Appellate Authority - Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, Sections 18(1)(b), 23; Limitation Act, 1963, Sections 5, 29(2) - Tenant's appeal before District Judge as appellate authority was dismissed as time-barred on the ground that the authority was a persona designata without power to condone delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act; the High Court confirmed following majority view in Jokkim Fernandez v. Amina Kunhi Umma (AIR 1974 Kerala 162). The Supreme Court examined statutory scheme and observed that appellate authority decides lis judicially and is subject to revision; the Court proceeded to consider whether Section 29(2) of Limitation Act applies to such appellate authority. B) Statutory Interpretation - Persona Designata - Court vs. Authority - Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, Section 18 - The appellate authority's reasoning that it is persona designata without power to invoke Limitation Act was not supported by respondent's counsel; the Court noted that an authority is persona designata only if powers are conferred on a named person and cannot be exercised by anyone else; the scheme of the Act contra-indicates such status because the appellate authority decides lis between parties judicially and its decision remains final subject to revision.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellate authority constituted under Section 18 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 has power to condone the delay in filing an appeal before it under Section 29(2) read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Law Points
- Appellate authority under Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act
- 1965 is not a persona designata
- Section 29(2) of Limitation Act
- 1963 applies to proceedings before appellate authority
- Section 5 of Limitation Act
- 1963 can be invoked for condonation of delay
- Authority deciding lis judicially is a court for Limitation Act purposes
- Powers of appellate authority under Section 18 of Kerala Rent Act include judicial determination subject to revision
