Arthur Wilson, J.

1. The question raised in this appeal is, whether in Section32 of Act X of 1859, where it is said, "the suit shall be institutedwithin three months from the end of the Bengal year or of the month of Jeyt ofthe Fusli or Willayutee year on account of which such enhanced rent isclaimed," the word "months" means months of the Englishcalendar, or in Orissa months of the Willayutee year.

2. It has been held by this Court that in the correspondingsection, Section 29 of the Bengal Act VIII of 1869, English calendar months aremeant. See Mahomed Elahee Btiksh v. Brojo Kishore Sen I.L.R. 4 Cal. 497 and thecases there cited. The construction of that Act, however, is governed by theBengal General Clauses Act, Bengal Act V of 1867. The Act now in question isunaffected either by that Act or by the similar Act of the Governor-General inCouncil, I of 1868. But the rule we have to construe is one of limitation; andin Limitation Acts the periods of limitation are reckoned according to theEnglish calendar unless a different intention is expressed Maharajah Joy MungulSingh v. Lall Rung Pal Singh 13 W.R. 183 : 4 B.L.R. Ap. 53. In the present Actthere are many sections in which periods of limitation are given; as forinstance, the very next section, Section 33, and Sections 90 and 93. In thesethere is nothing to indicate that any calendar other than the English isintended. The section now in question must, we think, be construed in the sameway, unless there are clear reasons for adopting another construction. It istrue that in this section, the Bengal, Fusli, and Willayutee years and monthsare mentioned and used for fixing the commencement of the three years periodof limitation in the first part of the section, and of three months in thesecond. But we do not think this a sufficient reason for reading the words oflimitation themselves in a different sense from those which bear like words inother parts of this Act, and in other enactments of similar scope.

3. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

.

Saroda Pershad Ganguli and Ors. vs. Pahali Mahanti and Ors.(06.06.1884 - CALHC)