Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-05-03 allowed

Ganesan rep by Its Power Agent G. Rukmani Ganesan vs Commissioner, The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Board & Ors

Bench: 2 — Ashok Bhushan

In Brief

This case addresses whether the Commissioner under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, can condone delays in filing appeals using Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Supreme Court held that the Commissioner, though not defined as a court under the Act, is nonetheless not a court for Limitation Act purposes. Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act applies only to court proceedings, not administrative tribunals. The Act contains no express provision applying Section 5, only computation rules (Section 115). The Court noted the Commissioner's suo motu revisional power ensures correction even when appeals are late, showing the Legislature did not intend Section 5 condonation to apply. The Court distinguished between procedural adoption of court rules and substantive applicability of the Limitation Act to non-court authorities.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Limitation Law Statutory Authorities Administrative Law Hindu Law Judicial Review Procedural Law

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login