C. R. No. 6613 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : C. R. No. 6613 of 2009 Date of Decision : July 26, 2010 Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. .... Petitioner Vs. M/s Quality Foils Pvt. Ltd. and another .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Anil Rathee, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hari Om Attri, Advocate for the respondents. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Plaintiff-Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (in short – BSNL) has filed the instant revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short – CPC). Petitioner filed suit against respondents for recovery of Rs.21,546/- as arrears of telephone bills for the period from August 1996 to December 1997 alleging that the defendants failed to pay the said amount of telephone bills. Defendants controverted the plaint allegations and also raised C. R. No. 6613 of 2009 2 the plea of bar of limitation besides other objections. Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hisar, vide judgment and decree dated 12.06.2007, decreed the plaintiff's suit. However, first appeal preferred by the defendants has been allowed by learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Hisar, vide judgment and decree dated 31.07.2009, thereby dismissing the suit holding the suit to be time barred. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiff has preferred the instant revision petition because second appeal does not lie in view of suit amount being less than Rs.25,000/-, as stipulated by Section 102 of Code of Civil Procedure. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that limitation period for filing suit by Union of India (predecessor of plaintiff-petitioner) was 30 years and the plaintiff came into existence w.e.f. 01.10.2000 and thereupon, the limitation period got reduced to 03 years and the instant suit was filed on 06.05.2003 i.e. within three years of coming into existence of the plaintiff-company and therefore, the suit is within limitation. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on an unreported judgment of this Court in the case of Rai Singh vs. Bharat Sanchar Nitam Limited (R. S. A. No. 3817 of 2007 – decided on 23.09.2008). On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents C. R. No. 6613 of 2009 3 contended that the limitation period started with the issuance of respective bills since August 1996 to December 1997 and since limitation period for filing of suit by plaintiff was three years, the suit filed on 06.05.2003 i.e. long after the limitation period of three years from the respective date of issuance of bills, is patently barred by limitation. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. In view of judgment of this Court in the case of Rai Singh (supra), the instant revision petition has to be allowed. In that case also, similar contention as raised in the instant suit by defendants was repelled after relying on some other judgments and after discussing the question in detail. It was laid down that suit filed by BSNL within three years of its coming into existence shall be within limitation. Consequently, in the instant case, suit filed by the petitioner-plaintiff within three years of its coming into existence was within limitation. Finding of the lower appellate court to the contrary is, therefore, patently illegal and unsustainable. For the reasons recorded herein above, the instant revision petition is allowed and judgment and decree dated 31.07.2009 passed by the lower appellate court are set aside and judgment and decree dated 12.06.2007 passed by the trial court, thereby decreeing the suit of the plaintiff, are restored. July 26, 2010 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE