RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY

Institute for Judicial Services Exam

Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

MOCK TEST-42
MAINS EXAMINATION
SUBJECT: LIMITATION ACT,1963 & TS/AP GAMING ACT
TIME: 3:00 HRS MARKS:100

Instructions:
1) Attempt all the questions compulsorily
2) All questions carry Equal Marks
3) Write the answers as orders of the questions
4) Strict your answer to the Question only
5) Write your Answers in 300 words only

QUESTION PAPER AND ANSWER KEY

1.What is the 'cause of action'? Discuss its relevance in determining the limitation period.

Introduction

The term 'cause of action' refers to the set of facts or legal grounds that give a person the
right to seek judicial relief against another party. It is a crucial concept in civil litigation as
it forms the foundation of a plaintiff's case.

Definition

A 'cause of action' can be defined as every fact which is necessary for the plaintiff to
prove in order to establish their right to a legal remedy. It encompasses all material facts
necessary to prove the plaintiff’s right to relief and to show the defendant’s liability.

Elements of Cause of Action

1. Right: The plaintiff must have a legal right that is recognized by law.

2. Violation: There must be a breach or violation of that right.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 2

3. Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered some injury or damage as a result of the
violation.

4. Relief: There must be a remedy that the court can grant to redress the violation.

Relevance in Determining the Limitation Period

The relevance of 'cause of action' in determining the limitation period is fundamental.

The Limitation Act, 1963, stipulates specific time frames within which legal action must be
initiated, and the calculation of this period is intrinsically linked to the cause of action.

1. Commencement of Limitation Period:

 The period of limitation begins when the cause of action accrues. This
means that the clock starts ticking from the moment the plaintiff has the
right to sue.

 For instance, in a breach of contract case, the limitation period starts from
the date the breach occurs.

2. Multiple Causes of Action:

 In cases where multiple causes of action arise out of a single transaction,

the limitation period for each cause of action is calculated separately.

 Example: If a contract involves multiple obligations, the breach of each

obligation might give rise to separate causes of action.

3. Continuous Cause of Action:

 Certain wrongs, such as ongoing nuisances or continuous trespass, may

result in a continuing cause of action, potentially extending the limitation
period as long as the wrongful act persists.

4. Effect of Legal Disability:

 If the plaintiff is under a legal disability (e.g., minority, unsoundness of mind)

at the time the cause of action accrues, the Limitation Act provides for the
suspension of the limitation period until the disability ceases.

5. Acknowledgment and Part-Payment:

 The cause of action can be renewed by acknowledgment of liability or

part-payment of the debt by the defendant, thereby extending the
limitation period from the date of acknowledgment or part-payment.

Judicial Interpretation

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

Courts have consistently emphasized the importance of identifying the correct cause of
action to determine the appropriate limitation period. Misidentification or failure to
recognize the correct cause of action can result in dismissal of the suit for being time-
barred.

 Case Law: In Balakrishna Savalram Pujari Waghmare v. Shree Dhyaneshwar

Maharaj Sansthan, the Supreme Court held that the cause of action means every
fact which, if traversed, would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to
support his right to the judgment of the court.

Conclusion

Understanding the cause of action is crucial for both plaintiffs and defendants in legal
proceedings. It not only helps in formulating the legal strategy but also ensures that
actions are initiated within the prescribed limitation period to avoid being barred by time.
The Limitation Act, 1963, thus ties the cause of action directly to the legal timelines,
emphasizing its relevance in the judicial process.

2. Explain the provisions related to the 'legal disability' under the Limitation Act, 1963.

Introduction

The Limitation Act, 1963, provides specific provisions to safeguard the rights of individuals
who are under a legal disability. These provisions are designed to ensure that such
individuals are not unfairly prejudiced due to their inability to pursue legal actions within
the prescribed time limits.

Definition of Legal Disability

Legal disability refers to the incapacity of a person to initiate legal proceedings due to
certain conditions recognized by law. Under the Limitation Act, 1963, legal disability
typically includes:

1. Minority: Individuals who have not attained the age of majority as defined by law.

2. Insanity: Individuals who are of unsound mind and therefore incapable of

understanding their legal rights or the legal processes.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 4

3. Idiocy: Individuals suffering from idiocy, a condition affecting mental faculties

similar to insanity.

Provisions under the Limitation Act, 1963

1. Section 6: Legal Disability

 Initial Legal Disability: If a person entitled to institute a suit or make an

application is under a legal disability (minority or unsoundness of mind) at
the time when the right to sue accrues, the limitation period does not
commence until the disability ceases. This means that the clock for the
limitation period starts ticking only when the person attains majority or
regains sanity.

 Subsequent Disability: If a person becomes legally disabled after the right

to sue has accrued, the running of the limitation period is suspended during
the period of such disability.

 Combined Disabilities: If the person suffers from more than one disability,
the limitation period begins only after all disabilities cease.

2. Section 7: Disability of One of Several Persons

 When one of several persons jointly entitled to institute a suit or make an

application is under a legal disability, the time limit for the suit or application
does not commence until the disability ceases for all such persons.
However, if the legally capable person institutes the suit or makes the
application, the limitation period applies as if there were no disability.

3. Section 8: Special Exception to Sections 6 and 7

 These sections do not apply in cases where the prescribed period of

limitation is three years or more, but the extension due to disability cannot
exceed three years from the cessation of disability or from the death of the
disabled person. This means the maximum extension provided due to legal
disability is limited to three years beyond the original limitation period.

Practical Implications

1. Protection of Rights: These provisions ensure that individuals who cannot act due
to legal disability are given adequate time to seek legal remedies once they are
capable of doing so.

2. Equity and Justice: The law seeks to balance equity by not penalizing those who
are unable to understand or pursue their legal rights due to their incapacities.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

3. Complex Cases: In cases involving multiple parties where some are under legal
disability, the provisions ensure that the disability of one does not unfairly prejudice
the others, provided actions are taken within permissible limits.

Judicial Interpretation

Courts have interpreted these provisions to ensure that the purpose of the Limitation
Act—to prevent the revival of stale claims—does not override the need to protect the
rights of individuals under a legal disability.

 Case Law: In Ramlal Motilal and Another v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., the Supreme
Court emphasized that provisions related to legal disability must be interpreted
liberally to protect the interests of those unable to protect themselves due to their
condition.

Conclusion

The provisions related to legal disability under the Limitation Act, 1963, are crucial for
ensuring that individuals who are unable to act on their own behalf due to minority or
unsoundness of mind are not unfairly disadvantaged. By providing for the suspension and
extension of the limitation period in such cases, the Act upholds principles of fairness and
justice.

3. Discuss the principle of 'limitation' and its necessity in legal proceedings

Introduction

The principle of 'limitation' refers to the legal concept that sets a maximum time period
within which a legal action can be brought. The Limitation Act, 1963, codifies these time
periods for various types of legal claims and actions in India. This principle plays a critical
role in the administration of justice, ensuring that disputes are resolved within a
reasonable timeframe and that legal certainty and finality are maintained.

Principle of Limitation

1. Defined Time Frames: The Limitation Act, 1963, prescribes specific time limits for
different types of legal actions, such as filing suits, appeals, and applications. These
periods vary depending on the nature of the claim.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 6

2. Commencement: The limitation period typically starts from the date when the
cause of action accrues, i.e., when the plaintiff's right to sue arises.

3. Bar of Limitation: If a legal action is not initiated within the prescribed time limit, the
right to bring the action is extinguished, and the courts will not entertain the claim.

Necessity of the Principle of Limitation

1. Legal Certainty and Finality:

 Finality of Litigation: Limitation periods ensure that legal disputes are

brought to an end within a reasonable time, providing finality to the parties
involved.

 Certainty in Rights and Obligations: It brings certainty to legal rights and

obligations, as individuals and businesses can rely on the fact that after a
certain period, they will not be subjected to claims or legal actions for past
events.

2. Preservation of Evidence:

 Fresh Evidence: Limitation periods encourage litigants to bring their claims

while evidence is still fresh. Over time, evidence may be lost, memories may
fade, and witnesses may become unavailable.

 Accuracy in Adjudication: Timely filing of claims ensures that courts can rely
on accurate and reliable evidence, leading to fair and just adjudication.

3. Reduction of Frivolous Claims:

 Discouraging Dilatory Tactics: Limitation periods discourage plaintiffs from

delaying the initiation of legal proceedings to harass or pressurize
defendants.

 Preventing Stale Claims: By barring stale claims, the law ensures that only
serious and diligent plaintiffs bring forth their cases, reducing the burden on
the judicial system.

4. Economic and Social Stability:

 Predictability for Businesses: Businesses can operate with a level of

predictability regarding their potential legal liabilities, fostering a stable
economic environment.

 Social Harmony: Timely resolution of disputes promotes social harmony by

preventing prolonged uncertainty and conflict.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

5. Efficient Judicial Administration:

 Case Management: Limitation periods help in managing the docket of the

courts efficiently by ensuring that old and potentially less meritorious cases
do not clog the judicial system.

 Judicial Resources: This allows judicial resources to be allocated to current

and more pressing matters, enhancing the overall efficiency of the legal
system.

Judicial Interpretation

Courts have consistently upheld the necessity and importance of the limitation principle,
emphasizing its role in ensuring justice and legal certainty.

 Case Law: In Ramlal Motilal and Another v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., the Supreme
Court of India highlighted that the Limitation Act does not confer any right of
action but only bars the remedy after the prescribed period.

 Equity and Fairness: Courts also recognize the need for a balance between strict
adherence to limitation periods and the equitable consideration of cases where
genuine hardships or legal disabilities exist, allowing for exceptions like
condonation of delay under specific circumstances (Section 5 of the Limitation
Act, 1963).

Conclusion

The principle of limitation is fundamental to the effective functioning of the legal system.
It ensures that legal proceedings are initiated within a reasonable timeframe, preserving
the integrity of evidence, promoting legal certainty, and enhancing judicial efficiency.
The necessity of this principle lies in its ability to balance the rights and obligations of
parties, discourage frivolous litigation, and contribute to social and economic stability.

4. What is the 'Bar of Limitation'? Illustrate with examples

Introduction

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 8

The 'Bar of Limitation' is a legal doctrine under the Limitation Act, 1963, which precludes
the initiation of legal proceedings after the expiration of a specified period. This principle
ensures that claims are made within a reasonable time, promoting fairness and legal
certainty.

Definition

The 'Bar of Limitation' essentially means that once the prescribed time period for bringing
a lawsuit has expired, the right to initiate that legal action is extinguished. The courts are
barred from entertaining any suit, appeal, or application filed after this period, except in
certain exceptional circumstances where the delay can be condoned.

Legal Provisions

Under the Limitation Act, 1963:

 Section 3: It explicitly states that subject to the provisions contained in Sections 4

to 24, every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made after the
prescribed period shall be dismissed, even if limitation has not been set up as a
defense.

 Schedules: The Act contains various schedules that list the specific time limits for
different types of legal actions.

Examples Illustrating the 'Bar of Limitation'

1. Breach of Contract:

 Situation: A enters into a contract with B on January 1, 2020. B breaches the

contract on June 1, 2020.

 Limitation Period: According to the Limitation Act, the period for filing a suit
for breach of contract is three years.

 Bar of Limitation: A must file the suit by May 31, 2023. If A files the suit on June
1, 2023, the court will dismiss the case as time-barred under Section 3 of the
Limitation Act.

2. Recovery of Debt:

 Situation: C lends money to D on March 1, 2019, and D agrees to repay by

March 1, 2020.

 Limitation Period: The limitation period for recovery of debt is three years.

 Bar of Limitation: C must file a suit for recovery by February 28, 2023. If C files
the suit on March 1, 2023, it will be barred by limitation.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

3. Property Disputes:

 Situation: E discovers that F has encroached on his land on January 1, 2010.

 Limitation Period: The period for filing a suit for possession of immovable
property is twelve years.

 Bar of Limitation: E must file the suit by December 31, 2021. Filing the suit on
January 1, 2022, would be time-barred.

4. Tort Claims:

 Situation: G is involved in a car accident on July 1, 2020, and suffers personal

injuries.

 Limitation Period: The limitation period for filing a suit for compensation for
personal injuries is two years.

 Bar of Limitation: G must file the suit by June 30, 2022. If G files the suit on
July 1, 2022, it will be barred by limitation.

Exceptions and Extensions

There are certain circumstances under which the bar of limitation can be relaxed:

 Section 5: Condonation of delay for appeals and applications if sufficient cause is

shown.

 Section 6: Legal disability (e.g., minority or insanity) delays the commencement of

the limitation period until the disability ceases.

 Section 7: When one of several persons jointly entitled to sue is under a legal
disability.

 Section 8: Special provision where a period of limitation is three years or more and
disability ceases before the prescribed period ends, extension limited to three
years after the disability ceases.

 Section 14: Exclusion of time spent in bona fide litigation in a court without
jurisdiction.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 10

 Section 15: Exclusion of time during which defendant was absent from India,
injunction, etc.

Judicial Interpretation

Courts have interpreted the provisions of the Limitation Act strictly to uphold the principle
of finality and to avoid the revival of stale claims. However, they also recognize the need
for flexibility in certain circumstances to ensure justice.

 Case Law: In Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another v. Mst. Katiji and
Others, the Supreme Court held that a liberal approach should be adopted while
considering applications for condonation of delay, emphasizing that substantial
justice should prevail over technicalities.

Conclusion

The 'Bar of Limitation' is a fundamental aspect of legal proceedings, promoting the timely
resolution of disputes and preventing the burdening of courts with outdated claims. By
understanding and adhering to the prescribed limitation periods, parties can ensure that
their rights are protected and legal proceedings are conducted efficiently.

5. Analyze the impact of fraud or mistake on the period of limitation as per the Limitation
Act, 1963.

Introduction

The Limitation Act, 1963, recognizes that certain exceptional circumstances, such as
fraud or mistake, may justify extending or modifying the prescribed limitation period. This
ensures that justice is not compromised due to the concealment of facts or inadvertent
errors.

Provisions under the Limitation Act, 1963

1. Section 17: Effect of Fraud or Mistake

 Fraud: If the institution of a suit or application is based on the fraud of the

defendant or if the defendant has committed fraud on the plaintiff, the
limitation period begins from the date when the plaintiff discovers the fraud
or could, with reasonable diligence, have discovered it.

 Mistake: If the suit or application is for relief from the consequences of a

mistake, the limitation period starts from the date when the mistake is
discovered or could have been discovered with reasonable diligence.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

 Concealment: If the right to sue is concealed by the defendant’s fraud, the

limitation period begins from the date the fraud was discovered or could
have been discovered with reasonable diligence.

 Immovable Property: In cases involving immovable property or any interest

therein, if the defendant has fraudulently concealed the plaintiff’s right, the
limitation period does not begin until the plaintiff has discovered the right
or could, with reasonable diligence, have discovered it.

Practical Implications

1. Delayed Awareness: Victims of fraud or mistake often discover the wrongdoing

after the standard limitation period has expired. Section 17 allows these victims to
seek legal redress from the date of discovery, thereby preventing wrongdoers from
benefiting from their deceit.

 Example: A sells land to B, fraudulently concealing that the land is under

litigation. B discovers the fraud five years later. The limitation period for B to
file a suit for rescission of the contract starts from the date of discovery.

2. Protection of Rights: This provision ensures that the rights of individuals are
protected, even when they are initially unaware of the fraud or mistake. It prevents
unjust enrichment and ensures that the wrongdoer cannot escape liability simply
because time has passed.

 Example: If an accountant makes a mistake in filing a company's taxes,

which is discovered three years later, the company can seek redress from
the time of discovery.

3. Reasonable Diligence: The Act emphasizes the plaintiff’s responsibility to exercise

reasonable diligence in discovering fraud or mistake. This means that a plaintiff
cannot remain willfully ignorant of potential issues to indefinitely extend the
limitation period.

 Example: If a person fails to check their bank statements for errors due to
negligence and discovers a mistake after many years, the court may

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 12

determine whether reasonable diligence was exercised to discover the

mistake earlier.

Judicial Interpretation

1. Discovery Rule: Courts have consistently upheld the principle that the limitation
period in cases of fraud or mistake starts from the date of discovery. However, they
also ensure that plaintiffs cannot misuse this provision to indefinitely delay legal
action.

 Case Law: In P.C. Chacko v. Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India,

the Supreme Court held that the limitation period commences from the
date when the fraud was discovered or could have been discovered with
reasonable diligence.

2. Burden of Proof: The plaintiff has the burden to prove that fraud or mistake
occurred and to show when it was discovered. This prevents frivolous claims and
ensures that only genuine cases benefit from the extension.

 Case Law: In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy, the Supreme Court

emphasized the necessity for the plaintiff to demonstrate the presence of
fraud or mistake and the time of its discovery.

Limitations and Considerations

1. No Perpetual Extension: Section 17 does not provide for a perpetual extension of

the limitation period. The plaintiff must act within a reasonable time after
discovering the fraud or mistake.

 Reasonableness: Courts assess what constitutes a reasonable time based

on the specific circumstances of each case.

2. Good Faith and Diligence: The provisions demand that plaintiffs act in good faith
and with due diligence. Courts are cautious about claims where plaintiffs delayed
discovery due to their own negligence or intentional disregard.

Conclusion

The impact of fraud or mistake on the period of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963,
ensures that individuals are not denied justice due to the deceitful actions or errors of
others. By allowing the limitation period to start from the date of discovery, the Act
provides a fair opportunity for redress while maintaining a balance to prevent abuse of
the extension. This approach upholds the principles of equity and justice, ensuring that
wrongdoers cannot exploit procedural technicalities to escape liability.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

6. Explain the doctrine of 'continuous running of time' as envisaged under the Limitation
Act, 1963.

Introduction

The doctrine of 'continuous running of time' is a fundamental concept under the

Limitation Act, 1963. It refers to the uninterrupted progression of the limitation period once
it commences, regardless of subsequent events or changes in circumstances, unless
specifically interrupted or extended by provisions within the Act.

Concept of Continuous Running of Time

The doctrine stipulates that the limitation period for filing a suit, appeal, or application
starts from the date when the cause of action accrues and continues to run without
interruption. This principle ensures that claims are made within a reasonable period,
promoting legal certainty and the efficient administration of justice.

Key Provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963

1. Commencement of Limitation Period:

 The limitation period begins from the date the cause of action accrues
(Section 9 of the Limitation Act, 1963).

2. Uninterrupted Continuation:

 Once the limitation period starts, it continues to run without interruption,

except in cases where the Act explicitly provides for suspension or
extension.

3. Exceptions and Extensions:

 The Limitation Act provides for certain exceptions and extensions where the
continuous running of time may be interrupted. These include:

 Legal Disability (Section 6): If a person entitled to sue is under a legal

disability (minority, insanity, idiocy) when the cause of action
accrues, the limitation period starts only after the disability ceases.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 14

 Fraud and Mistake (Section 17): The limitation period begins from the
date of discovery of the fraud or mistake if the right to sue is
concealed by fraud or arises from a mistake.

 Acknowledgment of Liability (Section 18): If there is an

acknowledgment of liability in writing before the expiration of the
limitation period, a fresh period of limitation is computed from the
date of acknowledgment.

 Part Payment (Section 19): If part of the debt or interest on the debt
is paid before the expiration of the limitation period, a fresh period
of limitation is computed from the date of the part payment.

 Time Excluded in Legal Proceedings (Section 14): Time spent in

prosecuting in good faith in a court without jurisdiction is excluded
from the limitation period.

Judicial Interpretation

Courts have reinforced the principle of continuous running of time to ensure that the
purposes of the Limitation Act are met. However, they also recognize the need for
flexibility in cases where justice demands the suspension or extension of the limitation
period.

1. Strict Adherence to Time Limits:

 Courts generally adhere strictly to the prescribed limitation periods to

prevent the indefinite prolongation of disputes.

 Case Law: In Baldeo Das & Ors. v. Murli Dhar & Ors., the Supreme Court
reiterated that the limitation period starts from the date of cause of action
and runs continuously, emphasizing the necessity of initiating legal
proceedings within the prescribed period.

2. Acknowledgment and Part Payment:

 Judicial decisions have highlighted the conditions under which

acknowledgments or part payments effectively reset the limitation period.

 Case Law: In K. M. Sharma v. Bharat Electronics Ltd., the Supreme Court

held that an acknowledgment of debt in writing before the expiration of
the limitation period leads to the commencement of a new limitation
period.

Practical Implications

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

1. Legal Certainty:

 Continuous running of time provides certainty and predictability in legal

affairs, ensuring that parties act diligently to protect their rights within the
prescribed time frame.

2. Prevention of Stale Claims:

 This doctrine prevents the revival of old claims where evidence may no
longer be reliable, witnesses may be unavailable, and memories may have
faded, ensuring that justice is timely and efficient.

3. Equitable Considerations:

 While the doctrine promotes timely action, the exceptions under the Act
ensure that equitable considerations are addressed, allowing for justice in
cases where delay is caused by legitimate reasons such as fraud, mistake,
or legal disability.

Conclusion

The doctrine of 'continuous running of time' under the Limitation Act, 1963, is crucial for
maintaining the efficiency and integrity of the legal system. It ensures that claims are
brought within a reasonable period, promoting legal certainty and preventing the
indefinite prolongation of disputes. The doctrine balances strict adherence to time limits
with provisions for exceptions, ensuring that justice is served without compromising the
principle of timely legal action.

7. Discuss the effect of the death of a party on the period of limitation.

Introduction

The death of a party involved in a legal proceeding can have significant implications for
the limitation period. The Limitation Act, 1963, addresses these implications to ensure that
the rights of the deceased's estate and the other parties involved are protected while
maintaining the integrity of the limitation periods.

Key Provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 16

1. Section 16: Effect of Death on or Before the Right to Sue Accrues

 If a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application dies before the

right to sue accrues, or if a person against whom the right to sue accrues
dies before the right accrues, the limitation period starts from the date of
the death of the person or the date on which the right to sue accrues,
whichever is later.

2. Section 6: Legal Disability and Subsequent Death

 If a person entitled to sue or make an application is under a legal disability

and dies before the disability ceases, the legal representative can file the
suit within the same period that would have been allowed if the person had
survived.

3. Section 22: Continuity of Limitation in Case of Death

 When a cause of action survives against the legal representatives of a

deceased person, the limitation period continues to run against the legal
representatives as if the death had not occurred. However, an extension is
allowed for the legal representatives to take necessary actions to pursue
the case.

Practical Implications

1. Extension of Limitation Period Due to Death

 Plaintiff's Death: If the plaintiff dies before filing a suit, the legal
representatives can file the suit within the original limitation period or within
90 days from the death of the plaintiff, whichever is later.

 Defendant's Death: If the defendant dies before the institution of the suit or
during the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff must bring the legal
representatives on record within the limitation period prescribed for the suit
or within 90 days from the date of death, whichever is later.

2. Survival of Cause of Action

 The cause of action must survive the death of the party for the legal
representatives to continue or initiate the suit. Causes of action that are
personal in nature (e.g., defamation, personal injury claims) typically do not
survive the death of the involved party.

3. Legal Representatives’ Right to Sue

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

 Legal representatives can step into the shoes of the deceased and
continue with the legal proceedings. They have the same rights and
obligations as the deceased party would have had.

4. Stay of Proceedings

 The court may stay proceedings temporarily to allow the legal

representatives to be brought on record and to prepare adequately for the
continuation of the suit.

Judicial Interpretation

1. Strict Adherence to Procedural Rules

 Courts emphasize strict adherence to procedural rules when substituting

legal representatives. Delays in bringing legal representatives on record
can lead to the dismissal of the suit unless a sufficient cause is shown.

 Case Law: In Union of India v. Ram Charan, the Supreme Court held that
the limitation period for bringing legal representatives on record should be
strictly adhered to unless a sufficient cause for delay is demonstrated.

2. Equitable Considerations

 Courts also recognize equitable considerations to ensure justice. They may

allow for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act if the
legal representatives can show sufficient cause for not being able to take
action within the prescribed period.

 Case Law: In Banwari Lal v. Balbir Singh, the court allowed the substitution
of legal representatives beyond the limitation period due to genuine
difficulties faced by the legal representatives.

Examples Illustrating the Effect of Death on Limitation Period

1. Plaintiff’s Death Before Filing Suit:

 Situation: A has a right to sue B for breach of contract. A dies before filing
the suit.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 18

 Action: A’s legal representatives can file the suit within the original limitation
period or within 90 days from A’s death, whichever is later.

2. Defendant’s Death During Pendency of Suit:

 Situation: C files a suit against D. During the pendency of the suit, D dies.

 Action: C must bring D’s legal representatives on record within the original
limitation period or within 90 days from D’s death, whichever is later.

3. Legal Disability and Subsequent Death:

 Situation: E, a minor, has a right to sue for recovery of property. E dies before
attaining majority.

 Action: E’s legal representatives can file the suit within the same period that
would have been allowed if E had survived and attained majority.

Conclusion

The effect of the death of a party on the period of limitation under the Limitation Act,
1963, ensures that the rights of deceased parties and their legal representatives are
protected while maintaining the integrity of the limitation periods. The provisions allow for
a fair extension or modification of limitation periods to accommodate the complexities
arising from the death of a party, thereby ensuring justice and legal certainty.

8.Evaluate the penalties prescribed under the Telangana Gaming Act for various
offences.

The penalties prescribed under the Telangana Gaming Act, 1974, aim to regulate
gaming activities and curb illegal gambling practices within the state. The Act defines
various offenses related to gaming and prescribes penalties accordingly. Here's an
evaluation of the penalties for different offenses under the Act:

1. Playing or Gaming for Money: Section 3 of the Telangana Gaming Act prohibits
playing or gaming for money or other valuable things in any public street,
thoroughfare, or place. The penalty for violating this provision is a fine of up to Rs.
100 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month, or both.

2. Keeping or Having Charge of Common Gaming House: Section 4 prohibits the

keeping or having charge of any common gaming house or assisting in
conducting the business of a common gaming house. The penalty for this offense
is imprisonment for a term not less than three months but may extend to six months,
along with a fine of up to Rs. 500.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

3. Being Found Gaming in a Common Gaming House: Section 5 of the Act imposes
penalties on individuals found gaming in a common gaming house. The penalty is
imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or a fine of up to Rs. 100, or
both.

4. Allowing Premises to be Used as a Gaming House: Section 6 penalizes individuals

who allow their premises to be used as a gaming house. The penalty is
imprisonment for a term not less than three months but may extend to six months,
along with a fine of up to Rs. 500.

5. Advertising Gaming: Section 8 prohibits the advertisement of gaming activities.

Any person violating this provision is liable for a fine of up to Rs. 100 or imprisonment
for a term not exceeding one month, or both.

6. Compensation for Police Officers and Informers: Section 9 provides for

compensation to police officers and informers who assist in the detection of
offenses under the Act. The compensation amount is determined by the
Magistrate hearing the case.

Evaluation:

 The penalties prescribed under the Telangana Gaming Act are designed to act
as deterrents against illegal gaming activities and ensure compliance with the
law.

 The fines imposed are relatively low, reflecting the socio-economic context of the
state. However, the provision for imprisonment serves as a stronger deterrent.

 The Act empowers law enforcement agencies to take action against offenders
and provides for compensation to those assisting in the detection of offenses,
which incentivizes reporting and enforcement.

 Overall, the penalties under the Act are balanced, aiming to maintain public
order and curb illegal gambling practices while avoiding undue hardship on
offenders. However, their effectiveness ultimately depends on enforcement and
awareness within the community.

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 20

9.Critically analyze the provisions related to ‘common gaming houses’ under the
Telangana Gaming Act.

The provisions related to 'common gaming houses' under the Telangana Gaming Act,
1974, play a crucial role in regulating gambling activities within the state. Here's a critical
analysis of these provisions:

1. Definition and Scope: The Act defines a 'common gaming house' as any house,
room, tent, enclosure, vehicle, vessel, or any place whatsoever in which gaming
is carried on. This broad definition encompasses various forms of gambling
activities conducted in physical premises.

2. Prohibition and Offenses: The Act prohibits the keeping, opening, use, or
occupation of common gaming houses. It also prohibits assisting in conducting
the business of a common gaming house. Violation of these provisions constitutes
a punishable offense under the Act.

3. Objective of Regulation: The provisions related to common gaming houses aim to

control and regulate gambling activities to prevent the negative social
consequences associated with excessive gambling, such as addiction, financial
distress, and organized crime.

4. Penalties: The Act prescribes penalties for different offenses related to common
gaming houses. Offenders may face imprisonment for a term not less than three
months but may extend to six months, along with a fine of up to Rs. 500. These
penalties are intended to deter individuals from engaging in illegal gambling
activities and operating common gaming houses.

5. Enforcement Challenges: Despite the provisions, enforcement of the law against

common gaming houses may pose challenges. Illegal gambling activities often
operate clandestinely, making detection and enforcement difficult for law
enforcement agencies. Lack of resources, corruption, and the involvement of
influential individuals may also impede effective enforcement.

6. Socio-Economic Implications: The regulation of common gaming houses can

have socio-economic implications. While strict enforcement may help curb illegal
gambling and its associated negative consequences, it may also lead to the loss
of livelihoods for individuals involved in the gambling industry, including employees
of gaming establishments.

7. Impact on Tourism and Revenue: Regulation of common gaming houses may also
impact tourism and revenue generation. In some cases, legalized gambling
establishments contribute significantly to tourism and generate revenue for the

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY
Institute for Judicial Services Exam
Hyderabad
www.rkjudicialacademy.com I Mob:9052439463I [email protected]

government through taxes and licensing fees. However, unregulated or illegal

gambling can tarnish the reputation of a destination and deter tourists.

8. Need for Balanced Approach: Balancing the regulation of common gaming

houses with the need to address social concerns and promote responsible
gambling practices is essential. Regulatory frameworks should aim to mitigate the
negative impacts of gambling while allowing for legitimate recreational activities
and minimizing the growth of illegal gambling markets.

In conclusion, the provisions related to common gaming houses under the Telangana
Gaming Act serve to regulate and control gambling activities within the state. While
these provisions are aimed at preventing the negative social consequences associated
with excessive gambling, their effectiveness depends on robust enforcement, balanced
regulatory frameworks, and addressing socio-economic implications.

10.Evaluate the procedure for search and seizure under the Telangana Gaming Act.

The procedure for search and seizure under the Telangana Gaming Act, 1974, provides
legal authority for law enforcement agencies to investigate and take action against
offenses related to gaming and gambling activities. Here's an evaluation of the
procedure:

1. Authorization by Competent Authority: The Act empowers specified officers,

including police officers, to conduct searches and seizures upon receiving
credible information or reasonable suspicion of illegal gaming activities. This
authorization ensures that searches are conducted by duly authorized personnel,
preventing arbitrary or unauthorized actions.

2. Reasonable Grounds: The Act requires that searches and seizures be based on
reasonable grounds, implying that there must be credible evidence or information
suggesting the presence of illegal gaming activities. This requirement helps
safeguard against arbitrary or unfounded searches, ensuring that law
enforcement actions are justified and proportionate.

3. Search Warrant Requirement: While the Act does not explicitly mandate the
obtaining of a search warrant, it is a common practice in legal procedures to
obtain warrants from a magistrate before conducting searches, especially in

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY

 22

cases where entry into private premises is involved. This requirement ensures
judicial oversight and prevents abuse of search and seizure powers.

4. Scope of Search: The Act allows authorized officers to search any place where
they have reasonable grounds to believe that gaming activities are being
conducted. This broad scope enables law enforcement agencies to effectively
investigate and uncover illegal gaming operations, including common gaming
houses and other premises where gambling activities occur.

5. Seizure of Gaming Instruments and Documents: Authorized officers are

empowered to seize gaming instruments, money, securities, books, and other
documents related to illegal gaming activities during searches. This provision
enables the preservation of evidence for use in legal proceedings and helps
disrupt illegal gambling operations.

6. Record-keeping and Documentation: The Act requires officers conducting

searches and seizures to maintain proper records of the items seized, the place
searched, and other relevant details. This documentation ensures transparency,
accountability, and the admissibility of evidence in subsequent legal proceedings.

7. Safeguards and Legal Rights: The Act includes provisions to safeguard the rights of
individuals subject to search and seizure operations. For example, individuals have
the right to be informed of the reasons for the search, the authority conducting
the search, and their legal rights during the process. These safeguards help
prevent abuses of power and protect individuals' constitutional rights.

8. Judicial Review and Remedies: The Act allows for judicial review of search and
seizure actions, providing affected individuals with legal remedies to challenge
the lawfulness of such actions. This mechanism ensures accountability and
recourse in cases of procedural irregularities or violations of legal rights.

In conclusion, the procedure for search and seizure under the Telangana Gaming Act is
designed to provide law enforcement agencies with the necessary legal authority to
investigate and take action against offenses related to gaming activities while
safeguarding individuals' rights and ensuring procedural fairness. Effective
implementation of these procedures requires adherence to legal standards,
transparency, accountability, and respect for constitutional rights.

*************************************************************************************

© RK JUDICIAL ACADEMY STRICTLY FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATIONS ONLY