By- Tarun kaushik (Ad.

)
9456695094, 9910395003 LIMITATION ACT, 1963
[email protected]

Q: Limitation Bars Remedy, But Does Not Extinguish Rights. Comment

The Law of limitation bars the remedy in a Court of law only when the period of limitation has
expired, but it does not extinguish the right that it cannot be enforced by judicial process (Bombay
Dying & Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. State of Bombay). Thus if a claim is satisfied outside the Court of law after
the expiry of period of limitation, that is not illegal as the right to cause of action always remains.
Similarly, even if the defence of limitation is not set bythe other party, the Court cannot accept any
suit, appeal or application beyond the period of limitation.
For example, where the recovery of a debt has become time barred by lapse of the prescribed period
of limitation, the right to the debt is not extinguished. If the debtors, without being aware of the bar
of time, pays the debt he cannot sue the creditor to refund the money to him on the ground that his
claims for recovery of the debt had become time barred.

Section 3
 Section 3 of the Act provides that any suit, appeal or application must be made within the
period of limitation as specified in Limitation Act.
 If any suit, appeal or application made beyond the prescribed period of limitation, it is the duty
of the Court not to proceed with such suits irrespective of the fact whether the plea of
limitation has been set up in defence or not.
 The provisions of Section 3 are mandatory.
 The Court can suo motu take note of question of limitation. The question whether a suit is
barred by limitation should be decided on the facts as they stood on the date of presentation of
the plaint.
 It is a vital section upon which the whole limitation Act depends for its efficacy.
 The effect of Section 3 is not to deprive the Court of its jurisdiction.
 Therefore, decision of a Court allowing a suit which had been instituted after the period
prescribed is not vitiated for want of jurisdiction. A decree passed in a time barred suit is not a
nullity.

Q: Limitation Act is the statue of Repose, Peace and Justice. Comment

The Limitation Act 1963 prescribes different periods of limitation for filing suits, petitions or
applications. The Act applies to all civil proceedings and some special criminal proceedings which
can be taken in a Court of law unless its application is excluded by any enactment. The statutes of
limitation are statutes of repose because they extinguish stale demands and quite titles. They lay, at
rest, claims which might otherwise have disturbed the peace of community. They secure peace by
ensuring security of rights and secure justice as by lapse of time, evidence may have been
destroyed. In S. C. Parashar v.
Vasant Sen, the Supreme Court has rightly observed that the statute of limitation is a statute of
repose, peace and justice. The intension of the law of limitation is not to give a right where there is
not one, but to interpose a bar after certain period to a suit to imposean existing right. The object is
to compel the litigant to be diligent in seeking remedies in courts of law.

Q: Write a short note on Doctrine of sufficient cause

Doctrine of sufficient cause

Section 5 allows the extension of prescribed period in certain cases on sufficient cause being shown
for the delay. This is known as doctrine of “sufficient cause” for condonation of delay which is
embodied in Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Section 5 provides that any appeal or any
application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant
satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the
application within such period.

The Section is not applicable to applications made under any of the provisions of Order XXI of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and also to suits. The Court has no power to admit a time barred
suit even if there is a sufficient cause for the delay. It applies only to appeals or applications as
specified therein. The reason for non-applicability of the Section to suits is that, the period of
limitation allowed in most of the suits extends from 3 to 12 years whereas in appeals and application
it does not exceed 6 months.

The party applying for condonation of delay should satisfy the Court for not making an appeal or
application within the prescribed period for sufficient cause. The term sufficient cause has not been
defined in the Limitation Act. It depends on the circumstances of each case. However, it must be a
cause which is beyond the control of the party. In Ramlal v. Rewa Coal Fields Ltd., the Supreme
Court held that once the period of limitation expires then the appellant has to explain the delay made
thereafter for day by day and if he is unable to explain the delay even for a single day, it would be
deemed that the party did not have sufficient cause for delay. It is the Court’s discretion to extend or
not to extend the period of limitation even after the sufficient cause has been shown and other
conditions are also specified. However, the Court should exercise its discretion judicially and not
arbitrarily.

Following events inter alia amounts to sufficient cause:

1. Wrong practice of High Court which misled the appellant or his counsel in not filingthe
appeal should be regarded as sufficient cause under Section 5;
2. In certain cases, mistake of counsel may be taken into consideration in condonationof delay.
But such mistake must be bona fide;
3. Wrong advice given by advocate can give rise to sufficient cause in certain cases;
4. Mistake of law in establishing or exercising the right given by law may be considered as
sufficient cause. However, ignorance of law is not excuse, nor the negligence of the party or
the legal adviser constitutes a sufficient cause;
5. Imprisonment of the party or serious illness of the party may be considered for condonation of
delay;
6. Time taken for obtaining certified copies of the decree of the judgment necessary to accompany
the appeal or application was considered for condoning the delay.
7. Ailment of father during which period the defendant was looking after him has been held to be
a sufficient and genuine cause (Mahendra Yadav v. Ratna Devi & others).

The quasi-judicial tribunals, labour courts or executive authorities have no power to extend the period
under this Section.
The test of “sufficient cause” is purely an individualistic test. It is not an objective test.
Therefore, no two cases can be treated alike. The statute of limitation has left the concept of
sufficient cause‟ delightfully undefined thereby leaving to the court a well-intended discretion
to decide the individual cases whether circumstances exist establishing sufficient cause. There
are no categories of sufficient cause. The categories of sufficient cause are never exhausted.
Each case spells out a unique experience to be dealt with by the Court as such.

Q: Discuss the law of limitation in relation to legally disabled person

Persons under legal disability

 Section 6 is an enabling section to enable persons under disability to exercise their legal rights
within a certain time. Section 7 supplements Section 6, Section 8 controls these sections, which
serves as an exception to Sections 6 and 7.
 The combined effect of Sections 6 and 8 is that where the prescribed period of limitation
expires before the cessation of disability, for instance, before the attainment of majority, the
minor will no doubt be entitled to a fresh period of limitation from the attainment of his
majority subject to the condition that in no case the period extended by Section 6 shall by virtue
of Section 8 exceeds three years from cessation of disability, i.e. attainment of majority.
 Sections 6, 7 and 8 must be read together. Section 8 imposes a limitation on concession
provided under Sections 6 and 7 to a person under disability up to a maximum of three years
after the cessation of disability.
 The period of three years under Section 6 of this Act has to be counted, not from the date of
attainment of majority by the person under disability, but from the date of cessation of minority
or disability.
 Both Sections 6 and 7 go together. Section 7 is an extension of Section 6, where the point of
time at which the existence of disability is to be recognized i.e. “the time from which the period
of limitation is to be reckoned”.
 To apply Section 7, disability must exist when the right to apply accrued, i.e., at the time from
which period of limitation is to be reckoned.
 Section 7 is only an application of the principle in Section 6 to a joint-right inherited by a
group of persons wherein some or all of whom are under the disability. The disability of all
except one does not prevent the running of time, if the discharge can be given without the
concurrence of the other. Otherwise the time will run only when the disability is removed.
 Section 8 provides that in those cases where the application of Section 6 or 7 of the Act results
in an extension of the period prescribed by Schedule, that extension is not to be more than three
years after the cessation of the disability.

Q: “Where once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to

institute a suit or make an application can stop it”. Explain

Continuous running of time

 According to Section 9 of the Act where once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or
inability to institute a suit or make an application can stop it provided that where letters of
administration to the estate of a creditor have been granted to his debtor, the running of the
period of limitation for a suit to recover debt shall be suspended while the administration
continues.
 The rule of this Section is based on the English dictum. “Time when once it has commenced to
run in any case will not cease to be so by reason of any subsequent event”. Thus, when any of
the statutes of limitation is begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability will stop this
running.
 The applicability of this Section is limited to suits and applications only and does not apply to
appeals unless the case fell within any of the exceptions provided in the Act itself.
 Thus, time runs when the cause of action accrues.

Q: Mention in brief the provisions relating to computation of period of

limitationunder the Limitation Act, 1963

1. Exclusion of certain days or exclusion of time in legal proceedings

 The day which is to be excluded in computing period of limitation is the day from which
the period of limitation is to be reckoned. In case of any suit, appeal or application, the
period of limitation is to be computed exclusive of the day on which the time begins to
run [Section 12(1)].
 The day on which the judgement complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for
obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or
reviewed shall be excluded [Section 12(2)].
 The time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgement shall also be excluded [Section
12(3)].
 The time required for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded [Section 12(4)].
2. Exclusion of time during which leave to sue or appeal as a pauper is applied for(Section
13).

3. Exclusion of time bona fide taken in a court without jurisdiction. (Section 14) The relief to a
person is given by Section 14 of the Act when the period of limitation isover, because
another civil proceedings relating to the matter in issue had beeninitiated in a court
which is unable to entertain it, by lack of jurisdiction or by any otherlike cause.
The following conditions must co-exist for the applicability of this Section:
 that the plaintiff or the applicant was prosecuting another civil proceedingsagainst the
defendant with due diligence;
 that the previous suit or application related to the same matter in issue;
 that the plaintiff or the applicant prosecuted in good-faith in that court; and
 that the court was unable to entertain a suit or application on account of defectof
jurisdiction or other like cause.

4. Exclusion of time in certain other cases

 When a suit or application for the execution of a decree has been stayed by an injunction
or order, the time of the continuance of the injunction or order, the day on which it
was issued or made and the day on which it was withdrawn shall be excluded.
[Section 15(1)]
 The time required to obtain the sanction or consent of the Govt. required, or a notice
period shall also be excluded in case of suits. [Section 15(2)]
 In a suit or an application for execution of a decree by any receiver or interim receiver or
any liquidator, the period beginning with the date of institution of such proceeding and
ending with the expiry of 3 months from the date of their appointment shall be excluded.
[Section 15(3)]
 The time during which the defendant has been absent from India and from the territories
outside India administered by the Central Government, shall also be excluded. [Section
15(5)]
 In case of death of a person before the right to institute a suit accrues, the period of
limitation shall be computed from the time when there is a legal representative of the
deceased capable of instituting such suit or making such application. The same rule
applies in case if defendant dies. [Sections 16(1)and (2)]
 Where the suit or application is based upon the fraud or mistake of the defendant or
respondent or his agent or in other cases as mentioned in Section 17, the period of
limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff or applicant has discovered fraud or
mistake subject to certain exceptions. (Section 17)

Q: What is a valid acknowledgement under the Limitation Act, 1963

Section 18 of the Limitation Act deal with the effect of acknowledgement of liability in respect of
property or right on the period of limitation. The following requirements should be present for a
valid acknowledgement as per Section 18:
1. There must be an admission or acknowledgement;
2. Such acknowledgement must be in respect of any property or right;
3. It must be made before the expiry of period of limitation; and
4. It must be in writing and signed by the party against whom such property or right is
claimed.
If all the above requirements are satisfied, a fresh period of limitation shall be computedfrom the
time when the acknowledgement was signed.

Q: When does the payment of interest or part-payment of principal amount by the

debtor extend the period of limitation? Discuss

As per Section 19 of the Act where payment on account of a debt or of interest on a legacy is made
before the expiration of the prescribed period by the person liable to pay the debtor legacy or by his
agent duly authorized in this behalf, a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time
when the payment was made.

Thus, according to this section a fresh period of limitation becomes available to the creditor from
the date of part payment when part-payment of debt is made by the debtor before the expiration of the
period of limitation.

Q: Discuss the rules in relation to the acquisition of ownership by possession.

Acquisition of ownership by possession

 Section 25 applies to acquisition of easements. It provides that the right to access and use of
light or air, way, watercourse, use of water, or any other easement which have been peaceably
enjoyed without interruption and for twenty years (thirty years if property belongs to
Government) shall be absolute and indefeasible.
 Such period of twenty years shall be a period ending within two years next before the
institution of the suit.

Q: Does the Limitation Act apply to a proceeding under Articles 232 and 226 of the
Constitution?

Limitation and Writs under the Constitution

The Limitation Act does not in terms apply to a proceeding under Article 32 or Article 226 of the
Constitution. But the Courts act on the analogy of the statute of limitation and refuse relief if the
delay is more than the statutory period of limitation (State of M.P. v. Bhai Lal Bhai). Where the
remedy in a writ petition corresponds to a remedy in an ordinary suit and latter remedy is subject to
bar of a statute of limitation, the Court in its writ jurisdictionadopts in the statute its own rule of
procedure and in absence of special circumstances imposes the same limitation in the writ
jurisdiction. If the right to property is extinguished by prescription under Section 27 of the
Limitation Act, 1963, there is no subsisting right tobe enforced under Article 32 of the Constitution.
In other case where the remedy only, not the right, is extinguished by limitation the Court will refuse
to entertain stale claims on the ground of public policy.
Q: Discuss the classification of period of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963
THE SCHEDULE

Classification of period of limitation

Depending upon the duration, period of limitation for different purposes may be classifiedas
follows:
Description of Suit Period of Time from which period begins
Limitation
SUITS RELATING TO CONTRACTS
For the balance of money advanced in Three years When the goods ought to be delivered.
payment of goods to be delivered.
For compensation for breach of a promise Three years When the time specified arrives orthe
to do anything at a specified time, or upon contingency happens.
the happening of a
specified contingency.
For compensation for the breach of any Three years When the contract is broken or (where there
contract, express or implied not herein are successive breaches) when the breach in
specially provided for. respect of which the suit is instituted
occurs or (where the
breach is continuing) when it ceases.
SUITS RELATING TO DECLARATIONS
To declare the forgery of an Three years When the issue or registration
instrument issued or registered. becomes known to the plaintiff.
To obtain a declaration that an alleged Three years When the alleged adoption becomesknown
adoption is invalid, or never, in fact, to the plaintiff.
took place.
To obtain any other declaration. Three years When the right to sue first accrues.
SUITS RELATING TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
By a mortgagor —
(a) to redeem or recover the Thirty years When the right to redeem or to recover
possession of immovable property possession accrues.
mortgaged
(b) to recover possession of immovable Twelve When the transfer becomes known tothe
property mortgaged and afterwards years plaintiff.
transferred by the mortgagee for a
valuable
consideration.
(c) to recover surplus collection Three years When the mortgagor re-enters on the
received by the mortgagee after the mortgaged property.
mortgage has been satisfied.
To enforce payment of money Twelve When the money sued for becomesdue.
secured by a mortgage or otherwisecharged years
upon immovable property.
By a mortgagee:
(a) for foreclosure Thirty years When the money secured by the
mortgagee becomes due.
(b) for possession of immovable Twelve When the mortgagee becomes entitled
property mortgaged. years to possession.
 For possession of immovable property Twelve The date of dispossession.
based on previous possession and not on years
title, when the plaintiff while in possession
of the property has been
dispossessed.
For possession of immovable property Twelve When the possession of the defendant
or any interest herein based on title. years becomes adverse to the plaintiff.
For possession of immovable property Twelve When the forfeiture is incurred or the
when the plaintiff has become entitled to years condition is broken.
possession by reason of any
forfeiture or breach of condition.
By a landlord to recover possession Twelve When the tenancy is determined.
from a tenant. years
SUITS RELATING TO MOVABLE PROPERTY
For specific movable property lost, or Three years When the person having the right to the
acquired by theft, or dishonest possession of the property first learnsin
misappropriation or conversion. whose possession it is.
For other specific movable property. Three years When the property is wrongfully taken.
To recover movable property Three years The date of refusal after demand.
deposited or pawned from a
depository or pawnee.
To recover movable property deposited or Three years When the sale becomes known tothe
pawned, and afterwards bought from the plaintiff.
depository or pawnee
for a valuable consideration.
SUITS RELATING TO MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
To set aside a sale by a Civil or Revenue One year The date of the final order.
Court or a sale for arrears of Government
revenue or for any
demand recoverable as such arrears.
Any suit (except a suit before the Supreme Thirty years When the period of limitation would begin
Court in the exercise of its original to run under this Act against a like suit
jurisdiction) by or on behalf of the Central by a private person.
Government or any State Government,
including the
Government of the State of Jammu &
Kashmir.
SUITS FOR WHICH THERE IS NO PRESCRIBED PERIOD
Any suit for which no period oflimitation Three years When the right to sue accrues.
is provided elsewhere in this
Schedule.

CLASSIFICATION OF PERIOD OF LIMITATION

Depending upon the duration, period of limitation for different purposes may be classified asfollows:
Period of 30 years: The maximum period of limitation prescribed by the Limitation Act is 30years and
it is provided only for three kinds of suits:
1. Suits by mortgagors for the redemption or recovery of possession of immovableproperty
mortgaged;
2. Suits by mortgagee for foreclosure;
3. Suits by or on behalf of the Central Government or any State Government includingthe State
of Jammu and Kashmir.

Period of 12 years: A period of 12 years is prescribed as a limitation period for various kinds of suits
relating to immovable property, trusts and endowments.
Period of 3 years: A period of three years has been prescribed for suits relating to accounts, contracts,
declaratory suits, suits relating to decrees and instruments and suits relating to movable property.
Period varying between 1 to 3 years: The period form 1 to 3 years has been prescribed for suits relating
to torts and other miscellaneous matters and suits for which no period of limitation is provided in the
schedule to the Act.

Period in days varying between 90 to 10 days: The minimum period of limitation of 10 days is
prescribed for application for leave to appear and defend a suit under summary procedure from the
date of service of the summons. For appeals against a sentence of death passedby a court of session
or a High Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction the limitation period is 30 days. For appeal
against any sentence other than a sentence of death or any other not being an order of acquittal, the
period of 60 days for the appeal to High Court and 30 days for appeal to any other Court is prescribed.
Period of leave to appeal as a pauper from the date of the decree is 60 days when application for leave
to appeal is made to the High Court and 30 days to any other Court.

LIMITATION AND WRITS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION

The Limitation Act does not in terms apply to a proceeding under Article 32 or Article 226 of the
Constitution. But the Courts act on the analogy of the statute of limitation and refuse relief if the
delay is more than the statutory period of limitation (State of M.P. v. Bhai Lal Bhai, AIR 1964 SC
1006). Where the remedy in a writ petition corresponds to a remedy in an ordinary suit and latter
remedy is subject to bar of a statute of limitation, the Court in its writ jurisdiction adopts in the
statute its own rule of procedure and in absence of special circumstances imposes the same limitation
in the writ jurisdiction.