Latest Article

Scope of Sec. 5 of Limitation Act, 1963

Courtesy/By: Tejal Unnarkar | 2021-03-22 14:18     Views : 71

 

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 provides an extension to the submission of any appeal or any application if the applicant satisfies the court the sufficient cause for not making the application in the prescribed period. The application under Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 are exempted under this clause. Whereas, the ambit of the section does not include suits. In most of the suites, the limitation period is extended from 3 years to 12 years whereas, for appeals and application, the limitation period is extended up to 6 months.

Expression “sufficient clause” includes:[1]

  • If the appellant was misled by any order or judgment of the High court in computing the prescribed period;[2]
  • A mistake on part of counsel ( must be bona fide);
  • Wrong advice by the Advocate;
  • The party may be considered for condonation of delay in case of serious illness or imprisonment.
  • Non-availability of the file of the case to the State Counselor Panel Lawyer is no ground for condonation of inordinate delay.
  • The time it took to obtain certified copies of the judgment decree, which were required to accompany the appeal or application, was taken into account when justifying the delay.

SC in its recent Judgement, overruling the decision in M/s NV International vs. the State of Assam, held that the application of section 5 of the Limitation Act, shall not be excluded from the schemes of Commercial courts. In Government of Maharashtra v. Borse Brothers engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd[3]., Justice RF Nariman, BR Gavai, and Hrishikesh Roy held that; A delay beyond 90 days, 60 days, or 30 days, resp., can be condoned by the way of exception, not by the rule of law.  The bench further says that if the party was bona fide and have not acted negligently, then in such case a short delay beyond the prescribed period can be granted by the court keeping in mind equity and justice.

The liberal interpretation of sufficient cause is not applicable in case of negligence, inaction, or lack of bona fides, the court has the power to stop the extension of the limitation period in these circumstances.[4]

 

[1] All about the Limitation Act, 1963

[2] Bhagirathi Padhan and Ors. V. Achuta Padhan and Others. On 15th December 1964

[3] [SLP(Civil) No. 665 of 2021]

[4] Basawaraj and another Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, 2013 (6) ALT(SC) 43 ( D.B. ).

 

This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1)(A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being. Further, despite all efforts that have been made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, White Code Legal and Tax shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to human error or otherwise. 

Courtesy/By: Tejal Unnarkar | 2021-03-22 14:18

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Notice

Message: Undefined variable: news_id

Filename: controllers/Welcome.php

Line Number: 3005

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/whitecode/application/controllers/Welcome.php
Line: 3005
Function: _error_handler

File: /var/www/html/whitecode/index.php
Line: 315
Function: require_once