Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1947)2MLJ482
..... us, some argument was directed on behalf of the respondent with reference to the indian soldiers litigation act, 1925. ..... have already expressed the view that in the absence of incorporation of the pro-visions of the code of civil procedure in the rules of procedure for the tribunals under the control act, there is no justification for the application of the principles of those provisions; otherwise it would mean applying those provisions when they are not made applicable. ..... the learned judge continued that with regard to his powers to set aside any previous order of his under the rent control act he made a distinction between a case like the one then before him and a case where notice of an appeal, having been served on a party, he did not appear for some sufficient ..... prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for(a) the procedure to be followed by controllers and appellate authorities in the performance of their functions under this act,(b) the manner in which notices and orders under this act shall be given or served.the learned chief judge of the court of small causes was duly appointed pursuant to section 12(1)(a). ..... the material provisions of the code of civil procedure had been made applicable to proceedings under the control act, or if there had been a rule corresponding to order 9, rule 23, or order 41, rule 21 contained in the control act rules then the learned chief judge would have had jurisdiction and authority to set aside his order. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1950Cal411,54CWN451
..... the only question that arises in this case is a question of limitation and depends on the construction of sections 10 and 11, indian soldiers' (litigation) act (iv [4] of 1925). ..... portions of the sections are as follows :section 10: '(1) in any proceeding before a court in which a decree or order has been passed against any indian soldier whilst he was serving under war conditions or at any time after the 1st day of april 1925, whilst he was serving under any special conditions, the soldier may apply to the court which passed the decree or order for an order to set aside the same, and, if the court after giving ..... ' * * * * *section 11 : 'in computing the period of limitation prescribed by the indian limitation act, 1908, or any other law for the time being in force, for any suit, appeal, or application to any court any party to which is or has been an indian soldier, the time during which the soldier has been serving under war conditions since 4th august 1914, or under any special conditions since 1st april 1925, shall be excluded.' * * * * *3. ..... an opportunity to the opposite party of being heard, is satisfied that the interests of justice require that the decree or order should be set aside as against the soldier, the court shall, subject to such .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All974
..... the date of the final order from which the period of limitation for the second application for execution could be computed was really 16-10-1941 and not the earlier date of 17-9-1941, (2) that, under section 11, soldiers (litigation) act iv of 1925, the decree-holder was entitled to have the period during which ram narain pathak had been in military service, namely that from july 1944 to 30-11-1946, excluded in computing the period of limitation for the ..... of these materials it appears to have been contended in the lower appellate court and it was urged before mo also by the decree-holder's counsel that ram narain pathak had been serving as a soldier 'under special conditions' within the meaning of section 11, indian soldiers (litigation) act, iv of 1925, and that, therefore, the decree-holder was entitled to have the entire period of such service excluded in computing the period of limitation for his applications for execution.the learned ..... judgment-debtors, although at the same time it refused to allow the decree-holder to amend his application claiming an exclusion of the period during which ram narain, judgment-debtor, had been in military service under section 11, soldiers (litigation) act iv of 1925, this on the ground that the decree-holder had not desired such amendment at the proper stage.9. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1954SC269
bose, j.1. this is a suit brought by a son to set aside an alienation made by his father more than thirty-nine years before the suit. the alienation was on 5-9-1907 and the suit was filed on 26-11-1946.2. the alienor is harnama. he died leaving two sons, kura and sawan. kura is the plaintiff. sawan was joined as a pro-forma defendant but was transposed as a plaintiff in the first appellate court and was given a decree there along with his brother kura. this decree was set aside by the union high court at patiala. the plaintiffs appeal.3. before we go further we may say at once that it was conceded that sawan who was transposed as a plaintiff can in no event be given a decree. any rights he had in this property are long time barred and they cannot revive simply because his brother, who was under a personal disability, was enabled to sue after the normal period of limitation had expired. the plaintiff kura was on military service and as such obtained an extended period of limitation. that is not disputed. but the privilege is a personal one and his brother cannot take advantage of it. therefore, the suit must fail against sawan's half share in any event. in view of this, it will be convenient to refer to kura as the plaintiff and ignore sawan's transposition.4. the plaintiff's case is that the property in suit was his father's ancestral property and that it was alienated without legal necessity. the hindu law does not apply and under the customary law which applies in this case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1957P& H69
..... plaintiffs claimed any military service, but they sought to obtain the benefit as regards limitation of the military service of the other set of plaintiffs on the basis of the wording of section 11 of the indian soldiers (litigation) act.the two suite were decided together and the findings of the trial court wore that the land was ancestral except for two khasra numbers, that the suits were within time as regards ..... section 11 of the soldiers (litigation) act are-'11. ..... a reasonable manner and it is clear that the object of this statute is to give any one who has served in the army on the war time conditions the benefit of this period of service in any litigation on which he wishes to embark and also to any party having a claim against a soldier and it can surely never have occurred to the mind of the legislators that any plaintiff who himself never served in the army could, by impleading ..... the courts below have held the suit to be within time on the strength of the use of the words 'any party to which is or has been an indian soldier' and it is contended that by impleading the previous set of plaintiffs as pro forma defendants in their suit the second set of plaintiffs are entitled to the extension of limitation furnished by the military service of these ..... they thus claimed the benefit of section 11 of the indian soliders (litigation) act iv of 1925.it was claimed that the land was ancestral qua themselves and bhagwan singh and that under custom they were entitled to the proportion .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1959P& H71
..... the proceedings were stayed under section 6 of the soldiers (litigation) act 1925 by order dated 1-3-1946 as bikram lal one of the sons and the legal representative of piare lal was on active 'service.the execution proceedings were resumed on 12-4-1947. ..... , 1947 which lays down--'x x x x x(1) all proceedings pending immediately beforethe appointed day in any civil or criminal court(other than a high court) in the province of bengal, the punjab or assam shall be continued in thatcourt as if the said act had not been passed, andthat court shall continue to have for the purposes ofthe said proceedings all the jurisdiction and powerswhich it had immediately before the appointedday; x x x xx x x x x'7. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1962All577
..... pathak had been in military employment from july, 1944, till the 30th of november, 1946, and the decree-holder could under section 11 of the indian soldiers (litigation) act, 1925, (act iv of 1925) get that period excluded while counting limitation. ..... was however rejected on the ground that section 11 of the soldiers (litigation) act, 1925, was subject to section 6 of that act and as the interest of ram narain pathak was identical with that of the other judgment-debtors in the case the decree holder could not get any advantage of the provisions of the soldiers (litigation) act. ..... proper appreciation of the second point reference is necessary to the various provisions of the indian soldiers (litigation) act, 1925. ..... has been decided the trial court shall, bearing in mind the observations we have made in this judgment, proceed to decide the question whether the appellant is entitled to get the benefit of section 11 of the soldiers (litigation) act and then decide the question of limitation.costs hitherto incurred shall abide the finalresult. ..... cases are sent back to the trial court for a decision of the question whether ram narain pathak judgment-debtor was serving under special conditions or war conditions as denned in section 3 of the soldiers (litigation) act during the period 17-9-1941 to 14-4-1946. ..... with him about the interpretation of section 11 of the soldiers (litigation) act and was of opinion that the decree-holder could not get the benefit of that act for extending limitation. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1964SC1336; [1964]3SCR495
..... interfered as the trial court had mis-construed and mis-applied the provisions of sections 10 and 11 of the indian soldiers (litigation) act 1925 (act iv of 1925). ..... some of such decisions prompt the observation that high courts have not always appreciated that although error in a decision of a subordinate court does not itself involve that the subordinate court has acted illegally or with material irregularity so as to justify interference in revision under sub-section (c), nevertheless, if the erroneous decision results in the subordinate court exercising a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or failing to exercise a ..... for the respondent was a case, which according to the reports, was a case in which the application for setting aside the ex parte decree passed on december 15, 1925, was made on april 19, 1926, much beyond the period of one month prescribed for making such applications from the date of the decree. ..... suit was instituted was a commercial loan, relief claimed by the judgment debtors could not have been granted to them as the act did not apply to commercial loans and as the court had no jurisdiction to give the necessary relief. ..... the court had no choice and if in construing the necessary provision of the limitation act or in determining which provision of the limitation act applies, the sub-ordinate court comes to an erroneous decision, it is open to the court in revision to interfere with that conclusion as that conclusion led the court to assume or not to assume the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1965P& H415
..... it was stayed under the indian soldiers (litigation) act, 1925 because mohinder singh and rajinder singh were serving in the army and it was not revived till 1946. ..... had there been a clear-cut issue on the point the exact period during which the suit was stayed under the indian soldiers litigation act would have been perhaps properly brought on the record so that the effect of s. ..... 11 of the indain soldiers litigation act considered, (x) the effect of migration to pakistan of those plaintiff-collaterals in the earlier litigation who had become muslims and of vesting of their interest in the property in question in the custodian of evacuee property was not canvassed before and considered below consider how must was banjar land and if it respect of ..... 7 of the indian solders' litigation act, 1925. ..... (14) although the words 'or otherwise dealt with'' appear to have been used by the legislature to connote any act or transaction in the nature of transfer of interest, but even if the widest possible meaning is given to them and they are to be regarded as covering the taking of possession by one party from the other during the pendency of a litigation, the question still remains whether that would affect the running-of the period of limitation when a subsequent suit for possession .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1968P& H26
..... iv of 1925) (hereafter referred to as the act), but still there is on record a certificate dated the 18th may, 1965, under section 7 of the act, reciting -'i have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your notice, dated 10th may, 1965, under section 6 of the indian soldiers (litigation) act, 1925 (iv of 1925), in the above mentioned proceedings, and to certify under section 7 of the said act that lt. ..... though it is common ground between learned counsel for the parties that no notice in the prescribed manner was given to the prescribed authority by the additional district judge, as required by section 6 of the indian soldiers (litigation) act, 1925 (act no. ..... the next relevant provision is subsection (1) of section 6, which reads: 'if a collector has certified under section 5, or, if the court has reason to believe, that an indian soldier, who is a party to any proceeding pending before it, is unable to appear therein, and if the soldier is not represented by any person duly authorised to appear, plead or act on his behalf, the court shall suspend the proceedings and shall give notice thereof in the prescribed manner to the prescribed authority'. ..... be that as it may, the fact remains that the provisions of the said act have been disregarded inasmuch as on the date of receipt of the certificate dated the 18th may, 1965, the soldier was not represented in court, and the certificate should have led the court to believe that the soldier was unable to appear as contemplated by section 6. .....
Tag this Judgment!