General Clauses Act| Period Of One Month Is Decided By Fixing Date Corresponding To Date On Which Period Starts: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court set aside the Sub Court's decision dismissing the Petitioner's application to appoint a Court official for executing a sale deed, after confirming that the deposit was made within time.
Justice A. Badharudeen, Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has explained that the period of expiry of one month or months, as the case may be, shall be decided on fixing the date corresponding to the date upon which the period starts.
The Court allowed a Writ Petition challenging the decision of the Sub Court which dismissed an Application by the Petitioner to appoint a Court official to execute a sale deed in respect of the plaint schedule property after finding that the deposit was not made within time. The Bench had to determine how `a month’ or `months’ was to be calculated to find out its expiry under Section 3(35) of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
A Single Bench of Justice A Badharudeen explained, “Thus it has to be held that period of expiry of one month or months, as the case may be, shall be decided on fixing the date corresponding to the date upon which the period starts, that is to say, if period of one month starts from 15.01.2025, one month would be completed on 15.02.2025 (but actually 32 days). The period of one month starts from 15.02.2025 ends on 15.03.2025 even though the days are only 29, (since 2025 is not leap year, but if the year is leap year, then it will be 30 days).”
Advocate KV Sohan appeared for the Petitioner.
Brief Facts
The Petitioner filed the Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking a writ of Mandamus to direct the Sub Court to restore an Application and verify the date of deposit with the original challan receipt or conduct an inquiry with the Bank.
The decree for specific performance was granted directing the Petitioner to deposit a sum within three months. The Petitioner deposited the said amount and filed I.A. seeking the appointment of a Court official to execute the sale deed. However, the application was dismissed on the ground that the deposit was not made within the stipulated time.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court referred to the decision in Bibi Salma Khatoon v. State of Bihar (2001), wherein it was held that the “British calendar would mean Gregorian calendar. It was held that when the period prescribed is a calendar month running from any arbitrary date, the period of one month would expire upon the day in the succeeding month corresponding to the date upon which the period starts.”
The Court held that the “period of expiry of one month or months, as the case may be, shall be decided on fixing the date corresponding to the date upon which the period starts, that is to say, if period of one month starts from 15.01.2025, one month would be completed on 15.02.2025 (but actually 32 days). The period of one month starts from 15.02.2025 ends on 15.03.2025 even though the days are only 29, (since 2025 is not leap year, but if the year is leap year, then it will be 30 days). Similarly, when the period of one month would start on 15.04.2025, the same would end on 15.05.2025 (31 days). In fact, in the instant case the decree was passed on 09.12.2003 and deposit of the balance consideration was on 08.03.2004. Therefore, the deposit was made very well within the time.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and I.A.No.1966 of 2004 stands restored back to file with direction to the learned Principal Sub Judge, Thalassery, to proceed further in accordance with law, after impleading the legal representatives of the respondent.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.
Cause Title: Badi Govindan v. Dayaroth Arikothan Rohini (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:20466)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates K.V.Sohan, K.Ambily And Sreeja Sohan.K.