TMI Blog1984 (3) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of title and delivery of possession with manse profits in respect of the properties described in the plaint. The State of Bihar-the 1st respondent herein is the main defendant in the suit. Prior to the institution of the suit, the plaintiffs had issued a notice to the 1st Respondent-State-under Section 80 C.P.C. on 18.2.1969 and Exhibit 2 is a copy of the said notice. However, without waiting for the statutory period of two months, the plaintiffs instituted the suit on 2.4.1969. In the written statement filed on behalf of the State of Bihar, it was contended, inter alia, that the suit was not maintainable for want of proper notice under Section 80 C.P.C. This contention was upheld by the trial court which also recorded ridings against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Secretary to that Government or any other officer authorised by that Government in this behalf ; (d) in the case of a suit against any other Government, a Secretary to that Government or the Collector of the district; * * * and, in the case of a public officer, delivered to him or left at his office, stating the cause of action, the name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff and relief which he claims; and plaint shall contain a statement that such notice has been so delivered or left. 4. The effect of the Section is clearly to impose a bar against the institution of a suit against the Government or a public officer in respect of any act purported to be don ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... suit if and when it is instituted. There is clearly a public purpose underlying the mandatory provision contained in the Section insisting on the issuance of a notice setting out the particulars of the proposed suit and giving two months time to Government or a public officer before a suit can be instituted against them. The object of the Section is the advancement of justice and the securing of public good by avoidance of unnecessary litigation. 5. When the language used in the Statute is clear and unambiguous, it is the plain duty of the Court to give effect to it and considerations of hardship will not be a legitimate ground for not faithfully implementing the mandate of the legislature. 6. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Counc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctum laid down by the Judicial Committee in Bhagchand Dogadusa v. Secretary of State for India. 54 I.A. 333 was cited with approval and followed by a Bench of five Judges of this Court in Sawai Singhai Nirmal Chand v. Union of India. [1966] (1) SCR 956 8. It must now be regarded as settled law that a suit against the Government or a public officer, to which the requirement of a prior notice under Section 80 C.P.C. is attracted, can not be validly instituted until the expiration of the period of two months next after the notice in writing has been delivered to the authorities concerned in the manner prescribed for in the Section and if filed before the expiry of the said period, the suit has to be dismissed as not maintainable. 9. On b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
