Limitation Period Archives

Interpreting S.468(3) CrPC in a way which considers relevant offences as one where summons is issued leads to absurdity; Delhi HC dismisses petition to quash complaint

“Limitation seeks to prevent abuse of process by filing vexatious and belated prosecutions. However, at the same time, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) is not blind to the problems faced by litigants and provides for extension of the limitation period in certain cases under Section 473¹ of the CrPC. Thus, CrPC also ensures that interests of bona fide complainants are not affected.”

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Limitation for filing S. 17 application under Arbitration Act, 1940 begins from awareness of award’s availability, not receipt of copy: Supreme Court reaffirms

Supreme Court said that allowing a party, already aware of the award, to delay proceedings by insisting on procedural formalities would frustrate the expeditious resolution of disputes, undermining the very purpose of the Arbitration Act.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Limitation for application for redetermination of compensation under S. 28-A of Land Acquisition Act starts from date of award: Supreme Court reaffirms

Supreme Court highlighted that the judgment in Union of India v. Pradeep Kumari, (1995) 2 SCC 736 has been rendered after considering the relevant provisions of the Statute and the principles of interpretation. However, the judgment in Ramsingbhai Jerambhai v. State of Gujarat, (2018) 16 SCC 445 is a short judgment only referring to the text of Section 28-A(1) of 1894 Act.

Legal RoundUp Topic-wise Roundup

Arbitration Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top arbitration cases from November 2024

Top arbitration cases on unilateral appointment, seat of arbitration, limitation period, scope of judicial scrutiny and more.

arbitration referral court enquiry limitation

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Under Section 11(6) A&C Act, Referral Court must limit its enquiry to the question of limitation period only: SC

Referral courts, at the stage of deciding an application for appointment of arbitrator, must not conduct an intricate evidentiary enquiry into the question whether the claims raised by the applicant are time barred.”

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Limitation period for adverse possession commences when possession becomes adverse, not upon plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership: Supreme Court reaffirms

“The evidence on the part of the appellants would reveal that instead of establishing ‘animus possidendi’ under hostile colour of title, they have tendered evidence indicating only permissive possession and at the same time failed to establish the time from which it was converted to adverse to the title of the respondent which is open and continuous for the prescriptive period.”

Case Briefs High Courts

‘S 149(1) neither effaces nor removes the first proviso to S153C (1)’; Delhi High Court quashes notice u/S 148 of IT Act

In cases where a search is conducted after 31-03-2021, the first proviso to Section 153C (1) would have to be construed and tested as regards the date when the Assessing Officer decides to initiate action against the non-searched entity.

Case Briefs High Courts

Limitation period for Government Applications governed by Art. 114(a) of Limitation Act, not Section 378 CrPC; Sikkim HC clarifies

The Court was of the view that both, the applicant in viewing the requirement of filing the appeal within six months as per S. 378(5) CrPC; and the respondents contending that the appeal should have been filed within sixty days as per S. 378(5), were equally incorrect.

limitation period suit filed on possession of immovable property

Cases Reported Never Reported Judgments

Never Reported Judgment| Cause of action for suit filed by reversioner for possession of immovable property arises on the death of a Hindu widow [(1953) 1 SCC 407]

This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on limitation period of suit on possession of immovable property.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

SC dismisses Centre’s plea to condone delay of 12 years and 158 days for filing restoration of suit; calls it a ‘mockery of justice’

“The length of the delay is a relevant matter which the court must take into consideration while considering whether the delay should be condoned or not.”

Case Briefs Supreme Court

‘3 years is a long period for filing application for appointing arbitrator’; SC suggests Parliament to bring amendment prescribing specific limitation period

Supreme Court, while allowing the present petition, appointed Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, to act as the sole arbitrator.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Limitation for appeal against acquittal can be condoned: Supreme Court

Supreme Court acknowledged that in case of special law prescribing a limitation period, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would have no application.

Case Briefs High Courts

‘Limitation period for arbitration to be decided by Arbitral Tribunal while passing order u/s 20 of A&C Act’; Telangana HC appoints nominee arbitrator u/s 11(6)

“It is a well-settled law that while deciding the question of appointment of arbitrator, the Court shall not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties.”

Case Briefs Supreme Court

COVID-19 Limitation Period Suspension included outer limit of period to condone delay: Supreme Court

The appellants mainly averred that the further period of 90 days had not expired on the date of imposition of lockdown as on 23-03-2020.

Case Briefs High Courts

Limitation period to appeal against Family Court’s decree is thirty days, delay can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown: Delhi High Court clarifies

“Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 operate in different spheres and apply to orders passed by different forums i.e., District Court and the Family Court respectively.”

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court set aside delayed show cause notice issued by Revenue Department under IT Act

The Delhi High Court observed that there was an unexplained substantial delay in issuing the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 09-11-2017 and thus, is inexcusable in the eyes of law

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Section 11B Central Excise Act’s limitation period applicable to claims for rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002: SC

Supreme Court observed that if it is accepted that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Act shall not be applicable with respect to claim for rebate of duty as there is no mention of Section 11B of the Act either in Rule 18 or in the notification dated 6.9.2004, then there will not be any period of limitation for making an application for rebate of duty.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court | Arbitration cannot be invoked even by consent of the parties once the claim is found to be time-barred

Delhi High Court: In a case filed by Extramarks Education India Private Limited (petitioner) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to

Case Briefs District Court Tribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

Consumer Forum | Can complainant raise consumer dispute where excess electricity duty is charged? Is he overriding statutory remedy if he already approached the Collector? Read on

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Gujarat State, Ahmedabad: Justice V.P. Patel, President and U.P. Jani, Member, addressed an appeal which was raised in

Case Briefs High Courts

[Name-Logo Dispute] Telangana HC | ‘GSK’ being widely known mark: GSK Life Sciences (P) Ltd. ordered to suitably delete word ‘GSK’; No violation of S. 35, TM Act found

Telangana High Court: Abhinand Kumar Shavili, J., addressed a matter wherein the name and logo of a company were in dispute. Instant