Rent control has power to condone delay under Sec 5 of limitation's act

SUMMARY

• The Kerala High Court has held that a Rent Control Court has the power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
• The appointment of a Munsiff as Rent Control Court is not as a persona designata or a quasi-judicial authority, bench observed while overruling a division bench judgment in Ratheesh v. A.M. Chacko and Another in which is it was held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is not applicable to proceedings before the Rent Control Court under the Kerala Buildings Act, 1965.
• The Full Bench was answering a reference by a division bench Faisal v. Vikas Chacko which had doubted the dictum laid down in Ratheesh case.
• Referring to the provisions of the Rent Control Act, the bench observed that being a special and a local law which does not expressly exclude the provisions of Limitation Act, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would apply to proceedings under the Rent Control Act, if the Rent Control Court is a 'Court'.
• Thus, the issue considered was whether the Rent Control Court is a "Court" in order to apply the provisions of S.29(2) of the Limitation Act.

WHAT IS SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT?

• Extension of prescribed period in certain cases. - Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), may be admitted after the prescribed period, if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.
• Explanation. - The fact that the appellant or the applicant was misled by any order, practice or judgment of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this section.

HIGH COURT'S POINT OF VIEW:

• The bench comprising Justices AM Shaffique, Sunil Thomas and Gopinath P. noted that, a single bench, in Abdul Rehiman v. Hameed Hassan Peruvad and Others had held that the Rent Control Court is a "court" and is not acting as persona designata.
• Referring to Section 3(1) of the Rent Control Act and the Government notification issued thereunder, the bench further observed that the Rent Control Court cannot go beyond the statutory powers vested in it.
• Even in the case of appellate authorities under Section 18 of the Rent Control Act, there is a conferment of power to the District Judge to function as appellate authorities.
• The bench answered the reference that In the light of the all discussion that took place, they are of the view that the Rent Control Court is not a persona designata.
• It is a Court and in the absence of any express exclusion, Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act applies.
• Consequently, the Rent Control Court has the power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Ratheesh (supra) does not lay down the correct law.