Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner And Ors vs Timmappa Died Per Lrs And Ors on 18 September, 2025

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                               -1-
                                                             NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                                          RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                                      C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                                          RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                                    AND 1 OTHER
                    HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                        DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

                                            BEFORE

                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

                    REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200406 OF 2018 (MON)
                                              C/W
                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200403 OF 2018
                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200404 OF 2018
                        REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 200405 OF 2018

                   IN R.S.A.NO.200406/2018

                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   THE COMMISSIONER,
                        JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
                        7TH FLOOR KHB BLOCK KAVERI BHAVAN,
                        BENGALURU - 560 001.

Digitally signed   2.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
by RENUKA               ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAICHUR - 585 401.
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF                 3.   THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
KARNATAKA               DISTRICT WATER SHED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
                        (JALA NAYANA) NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
                        RAICHUR - 585 401.

                   4.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
                        DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT
                        DEPARTMENT,
                        NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
                        RAICHUR - 585 401.

                   5.   THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
                        GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                        RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                    C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                        RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                  AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



     VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 01.

6.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
     RAICHUR, DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.

7.   THE SECRETARY,
     GRAM PANCHAYAT MAMADDODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                                ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI MAQBOOL AHMED, A.G.A. AND
SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, A.A.A.)

AND:

1.   TIMMAPPA
     S/O: HULIGEPPA,
     AGE ABOUT: 36 YEARS,
     OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.

2.   GANGAMMA
     W/O TIMMAPPA,
     AGE ABOUT: 31 YEARS,
     OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE)

     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE LOWER COURT
RECORDS AND ALLOW THE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL AND
THEREBY PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
PASSED IN R.A.NO.14/2017 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., RAICHUR ON DATED 27TH
AUGUST 2018 AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE RESPONDENT
PLAINTIFF IN O.S.NO.296/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL
JUDGE AT RAIHCUR DATED 18TH AUGUST 2016 ALONG WITH
COSTS THROUGH OUT TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
                               -3-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                        RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                    C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                        RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                  AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



IN R.S.A.NO.200403/2018

BETWEEN:

1.   THE COMMISSIONER,
     JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     7TH FLOOR KHB BLOCK KAVERI BHAVAN,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
     ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAICHUR - 585 401.

3.   THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
     DISTRICT WATER SHED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     (JALA NAYANA) NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
     RAICHUR - 585 401.

4.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
     DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT
     DEPARTMENT,
     NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
     RAICHUR - 585 401.

5.   THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001.

6.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
     RAICHUR, DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.

7.   THE SECRETARY,
     GRAM PANCHAYAT MAMADDODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                                ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI MAQBOOL AHMED, A.G.A. AND
SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, A.A.A.)

AND:

1.   TIMMAPPA DIED PER LRS.

A.   LAXMI W/O LATE TIMMAPPA
                             -4-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                        RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                    C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                        RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                  AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



     AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: VILLATE MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAIHCUR - 585 401.

B.   JAMBALAMMA D/O LATE TIMMAPPA
     AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
     R/O: VILLATE MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAIHCUR - 585 401.

C.   VEERESH S/O LATE TIMMAPPA
     AGE: 17 YEARS, MINORS
     UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS
     MOTHER (LR NO.1(A)

D.   URUKUNDAMMA D/O LATE TIMMAPPA
     AGE: 14 YEARS, MINORS
     UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS
     MOTHER (LR NO.1(A)

     RESPONDENT NO.1(A) TO 1(D)

2.   SMT. LAXMI W/O THIMMAPPA
     AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
     R/O: MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR.
                                             ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE)

     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE lower court RECORDS
AND ALLOW THE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL AND THEREBY
PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED IN
R.A.NO.16/2017 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., RAICHUR ON DATED 27TH AUGUST 2018
AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE RESPONDENT PLAINTIFF IN
O.S.NO.298/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AT
RAIHCUR DATED 18TH AUGUST 2016 ALONG WITH COSTS
THROUGH OUT TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
                             -5-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                         RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                     C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                         RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                   AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



IN R.S.A.NO.200404/2018

BETWEEN:

1.   THE COMMISSIONER,
     JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     7TH FLOOR KHB BLOCK KAVERI BHAVAN,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
     ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAICHUR - 585 401.

3.   THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
     DISTRICT WATER SHED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     (JALA NAYANA) NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
     RAICHUR - 585 401.

4.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
     DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT
     DEPARTMENT,
     NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
     RAICHUR - 585 401.

5.   THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001.

6.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
     RAICHUR, DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.

7.   THE SECRETARY,
     GRAM PANCHAYAT MAMADDODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                                 ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI MAQBOOL AHMED, A.G.A. AND
SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, A.A.A.)

AND:

1.   HAJI MALLESHI S/O KAPALDODDI,
     AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
                             -6-
                                          NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                        RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                    C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                        RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                  AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



     TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR - 585 401.

2.   THIMALAMMA @ TIMMAKKA W/O HAJI MALLESHI,
     AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                         ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE)

     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE LOWER COURT
RECORDS AND ALLOW THE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL AND
THEREBY PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
PASSED IN R.A.NO.15/2017 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., RAICHUR ON DATED 27TH
AUGUST 2018 AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE RESPONDENT
PLAINTIFF IN O.S.NO.292/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL
JUDGE AT RAIHCUR DATED 18TH AUGUST 2016 ALONG WITH
COSTS THROUGH OUT TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.

IN R.S.A.NO.200405/2018

BETWEEN:

1.   THE COMMISSIONER,
     JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     7TH FLOOR KHB BLOCK KAVERI BHAVAN,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.   THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
     ZILLA PANCHAYAT RAICHUR - 585 401.

3.   THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
     DISTRICT WATER SHED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,
     (JALA NAYANA) NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
     RAICHUR - 585 401.

4.   THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
     DEPARTMENT, DISTRICT JALA NAYANA DEVELOPMENT
     DEPARTMENT,
     NEAR DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX,
                             -7-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                        RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                    C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                        RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                  AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



     RAICHUR - 585 401.

5.   THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
     GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
     VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001.

6.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
     RAICHUR, DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.

7.   THE SECRETARY,
     GRAM PANCHAYAT MAMADDODDI,
     TALUKA AND DISTRICT RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                                ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI MAQBOOL AHMED, A.G.A. AND
SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, A.A.A.)

AND:

1.   GOLLAR ERAPPA S/O KRISTAPPA,
     AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR - 585 401.

2.   SMT. HONNAMMA @ VANNAMMA,
     W/O GOLLAR EARAPPA,
     AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
     R/O: VILLAGE MAMAD DODDI,
     TQ: AND DIST: RAICHUR - 585 401.
                                              ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADVOCATE)

     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
100 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE LOWER COURT
RECORDS AND ALLOW THE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL AND
THEREBY PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE
PASSED IN R.A.NO.13/2017 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., RAICHUR ON DATED 27TH
AUGUST 2018 AND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE RESPONDENT
PLAINTIFF IN O.S.NO.294/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL
JUDGE AT RAIHCUR DATED 18TH AUGUST 2016 ALONG WITH
                                 -8-
                                               NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576
                                               RSA No. 200406 of 2018
                                           C/W RSA No. 200403 of 2018
                                               RSA No. 200404 of 2018
                                                         AND 1 OTHER
HC-KAR



COSTS THROUGH OUT TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.

    THESE REGULAR SECOND APPEALS, COMING ON FOR
ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS
UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR


                       ORAL JUDGMENT

All these four appeals are filed by the appellants-

defendant Nos.1 to 8 praying to set aside the Judgment and

decree dated 27.08.2018 passed in R.A.No.13/2017,

R.A.No.14/2017, R.A.No.15/2017 and R.A.No.16/2017 by

the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Raichur,

(for short 'the first appellate Court').

2. The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit for awarding

compensation in respect of death of Yallavva, Chilakamma,

Narasingamma and Jyoti, who had gone to graze the cattles

near the Krishi Honda and when they had been to drink

water, they fell down in Krishi Honda and died on the spot

due to drowning, on 21.07.2007. The death of the said four

children is due to negligent act of the defendants in not

maintaining Krishi Honda properly with all safety measures,

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

in order to avoid untoward incidents. The appellants herein

have disputed their liability to pay the compensation. The

trial Court in all the four suits has recorded evidence on both

sides and decreed the suits by awarding compensation in a

sum of Rs.2,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per

annum from the date of suit, till realization. In the said suit,

issue No.4 was with regard to bar of suit by limitation. The

trial Court referring to Article 113 of the Limitation Act, has

held that, the suit is filed within three years from the date of

death of the children and as per Article 113 of the Limitation

Act, the suit is filed within time and answered the said issue

No.4 in the negative.

3. Aggrieved by the said Judgments of the trial

Court, the defendants have filed four appeals in

R.A.No.13/2017, R.A.No.14/2017, R.A.No.15/2017 and

R.A.No.16/2017 before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge

and JMFC Court, Raichur (for short 'the first appellate

Court'). The first appellate Court has clubbed all the four

appeals and passed common Judgment. The first appellate

Court after hearing the arguments on both sides, has

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

dismissed the four appeals. Challenging the said Judgments

passed by the first appellate Court, the present four appeals

are filed before this Court by the defendants. The said four

appeals came to be admitted to consider the following

substantial questions of law:

(i) Whether the trial Court is justified in decreeing the suit for compensation rejecting the contention of limitation relying on residuary Article 113 of Limitation Act when there is specific Article dealing with limitation for suit filed seeking compensation ?

(ii) Whether the judgments of the Courts below are result of non-appreciation of material on record in its proper perspective?

4. Heard the arguments of Additional Advocate

General for the appellants and the learned counsel for the

respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants would contend

that, the suits ought to have been filed within two years from

the date of death and the Article 82 of the Limitation Act

would apply. She further submits that, when there is specific

Article in the Limitation Act, the residuary Article i.e. Article

- 11 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

113 is not applicable. All the four suits are filed beyond two

years and therefore, the suits are barred by limitation. On

these grounds, she prays to allow the appeals.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents would

contend that, the suits are not filed under Fatal Accidents

Act, 1855. The suits are filed under Order VII Rule 1 of CPC.,

invoking jurisdiction of the Courts under Section 9 of the

CPC. He submits that, Article 82 of the Limitation Act applies

if an application is made under Section 1A of the Fatal

Accidents Act, 1855 and the said application has to be filed

before the District Judge. In the case on hand, the suits are

filed before the Civil Court invoking jurisdiction under Section

9 of the CPC. Therefore, Article 82 of the Limitation Act does

not apply and Article 113 of the Limitation Act is applicable.

He submits that, considering the said aspect, the trial Court

and the first appellate Court have rightly answered issue

regarding limitation. With this, he prays to dismiss the

appeals.

- 12 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

7. Having heard the learned counsels on both sides,

this Court has perused the impugned common Judgment and

the trial Court records.

8. A similar question has arisen, whether Article 82

or Article 113 apply to the suits filed for claiming

compensation for negligent act of the authorities which

caused death before the division Bench of this Court in the

case of Assistant Engineer (ElE), Chamundeswari

Electricity Supply Corporation Vs. Smt. Lakshmi @

Radha and two others, in RFA No.495/2019 (MON),

disposed of on 17.02.2020. In the said case, the Division

Bench has elaborately considered Article 82 and 113 of

Limitation Act and also decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of Damini and another Vs. Managing Director,

Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and another in

Civil Appeal No.12851/2017 and held as under:

"19. The rival contentions of the respective parties have been considered by us. In order to appreciate the same, it would be useful to extract Articles 82 and 113 of the Schedule to the Act as under:

- 13 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

PART VII - SUITS RELATING TO TORT Description of suit Period of Time from which Limitation period begins to run

82. By executors, Two years The date of the death administrators or of the person killed representatives under the Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 (13 of 1855).

PART X - SUITS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO PRESCRIBED PERIOD

Description of suit Period of Time from which Limitation period begins to run

113. Any suit for Three years When the right to sue which no period of accrues limitation is provided elsewhere in this schedule

On a reading of the same, it is clear that when a suit is filed under the Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 by executors, administrators or representatives, then the limitation period is two years from the date of death of a person. However, if a suit is filed de hors the said Act, there is no prescribed period of limitation under Part VII, which deals with suits relating to tort. We have closely perused Articles 72 to 91, and in none of the Articles is there a reference to a suit filed seeking compensation on account of death de hors the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 i.e., a suit being filed under common law or tort law to seek compensation on account of death of a person due to negligence on the part of the respondents and not by way of a statutory action. In the circumstances, Article

- 14 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

113 in Part X would apply as this is an omnibus article which is applicable to suits where there is no specifically prescribed period of limitation. Hence, in the instant case, when the suit was not filed under the provisions of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and was filed for enforcing a common law right as per Section 9 of the CPC, there being no specific period of limitation fixed in Part VII of the Schedule to the Act, Article 113 would apply. The trial Court was justified in entertaining the suit as in the instant case, M.J.Shekar died on 24/05/2010, but the suit was filed on 27/07/2017, which was well within three years the period of limitation prescribed under Article 113 of the Schedule to the Act after bearing in mind Sections 13 and 19 of the Limitation Act.

20. We find much force in the arguments of learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs inasmuch as in our view Section 19 of the Limitation Act would apply and the application was filed on 28/08/2014 as P.Misc.No.8/2014 was well within time if the limitation period of three years commenced from 16/02/2012, when ex-gratia payment of Rs.1.00 lakh was made to the respondents/respondents Section 13 of the Limitation Act also applies. Hence, point No.1 is answered in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendant.

21. However, learned counsel for the defendant/appellant relied upon the judgment of Gauhati High Court in the case of Smt. Maya Rani Ghosh etc., Vs. State of Tripura and others (AIR 2007 Gauhati 76). We have perused the said judgment and we find that in the

- 15 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

said judgment, the question was whether the suit filed under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, had to be filed before the jurisdictional trial Court or before the District Court by filing an application. It was held that in the absence of special Court or Tribunal set up under the said Act, the suit had to be filed before the District Court and in terms of Article 82 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, but in the instant case, the suit filed by the respondents/plaintiffs was not under the provisions of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, and hence, the said judgment is of no assistance to the appellant.

22. Similarly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Damini and another Vs. Managing Director, Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited and another (Civil Appeal No.12851/2017), does not assist the appellant as in the said case also suit was filed under the provisions of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and it was held that in such a case, Article 82 to the Schedule of Limitation Act would apply and that the residuary article does not apply. As already noted in the instant case, the suit was not filed under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and hence, Article 82 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act does not apply."

9. In the case on hand, the suits are filed by

invoking jurisdiction of Civil Courts under Section 9 of CPC.,

and suits are not filed under the provisions of Fatal Accidents

Act, 1855 and were filed for enforcing a common law right as

- 16 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:5576

AND 1 OTHER HC-KAR

per Section 9 of CPC, there being no specific period of

limitation fixed in Part VII of Schedule of Limitation Act,

Article 113 would apply. Considering the said aspect, the trial

Court and the first appellate Court have rightly held that, the

suits filed are within limitation as per Article 113 of the