LIMITATION ACT, 1963

INTRODUCTION

It is said that "Justice delayed justice denied." The Limitation Act, 1963 puts limitation on
suit, appeal & application. Any suit, appeal or application if made beyond the prescribed
period of limitation, it is the duty of the Court not to proceed with such suit, appeal and
application. The Law of Limitation is based on equitable principle that equity helps the
diligent and not the indolent. It induces the claimants to be prompt in claiming the relief. The
object of the law is to help bona fide claimants and to prevent fraud being practiced by people
upon innocent persons by action being kept hanging upon them for a long time. The object of
the statute of limitation is preventive and not creative. It interposes a statutory bar after a
certain period the provisions of the Act should be strictly interpreted and it is always
considered necessary that a litigant, who relies upon it, should bring his cause within the four
corners of the terms of the statute. The Act extends to whole of India except State of
Jammu & Kashmir. It came into force on 1st January, 1964.

BAR OF LIMITATION

Every suit instituted, appeal preferred and application made after the prescribed period
shall be dismissed. Comment.

Bar of Limitation [Section 3]: Any suit, appeal or application if made beyond the prescribed
period of limitation, it is the duty of the Court not to proceed with such suit, appeal and
application. This provision of Section 3 is known as 'Bar of Limitation'. The provisions of
Section 3 are mandatory.

Exceptions to bar of limitation:

(1) Expiry of period when Court is closed [Section 4]: Where the prescribed period for any
it, appeal or application expires on a day when the Court is closed, the suit, appeal or
application may be instituted, preferred or made on the day when the Court reopens.

(2) Sufficient cause [Section 5]: Any appeal or any application 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. This section
only applies to appeals and applications; it does not apply to suits.

(3) Persons under legal disability [Section 6]: The general rule of law is that limitation
begins to run from the date of the cause of action. But in case of persons suffering from some
legal disability (e.g. minority, insanity or idiocy) the period of limitation runs from the
cessation of disability.

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".
 Section 5 provides that any appeal or application (not plaint or suit) 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.
 Section 5 applies only to appeals or applications. 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.

Examples of sufficient cause: What is sufficient cause and what is not may be explained by
the following judicial observations: -

 Wrong practice of High Court which misled the appellant or his counsel in not filing
the appeal should be regarded as sufficient cause under Section 5.
 In certain cases, mistake of counsel may be taken into consideration in condensation 01
delay, but such mistake must be bona fide.
 Wrong advice given by advocate can give rise to sufficient cause in certain cases. -
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, not the negligence of the party
or the legal adviser constitutes a sufficient cause;
 Imprisonment of the party or serious illness of the party may be considered for
condonation of delay.
 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.
 Non-availability of the file of the case to the State Counselor Panel Lawyer is no ground
for condonation of inordinate delay.
 Ailment of father during which period the defendant was looking after him has been held
to be a sufficient and genuine cause.
Note: The Quasi-judicial Tribunals, Labour Courts or Executive Authorities have no power to
extend the period under this Section.

LAW OF LIMITATION RELATING TO LEGALLY DISABLED PERSONS

Legal disability [Section 6]: Law of limitation relating to legally disabled persons is
explained below:

 If a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application is a minor, insane or idiot at

the time of cause of action, the period of limitation to file a suit or to make an application
will start when such disability ceases.
 Where one legal disability is followed by another legal disability, the disabilities are
successive and the limitation period will run when all the legal disabilities are ceased.
 If a legal disability continues up to a death, then period of limitation will run for legal
representative (who is not legally disabled) from the date of death.
 Where a person under disability dies after the disability ceases but within the period
allowed to him under this section, his legal representative may institute the suit or make
the application within the same period after the death, as would otherwise have been
available to that person had he not died.

Disability of one of several persons [Section 7]: Where one of several persons jointly
entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution of a decree is under any
such disability, and a discharge can be given without the concurrence of such person, time
will run against them all; but, where no such discharge can be given, time will not run as
against any of them until one of them becomes capable of giving such discharge without the
concurrence of the others or until the disability has ceased.

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.
Special exceptions [Section 8]: In those cases where the application of Section 6 or 7 results
in an extension of the period of limitation, that extension is not to be more than 3 years after
the cessation of the disability.

Question No:1
While going to the court for filing a suit, Amar meets with an accident. As a
consequence thereof, Amar remains unconscious for 15 days. The period of limitation
for filing the suit expires during this period. Can Amar claim extension of time?

According to Section 3, any suit, appeal or application if made beyond the prescribed period
of limitation, it is the duty of the Court not to proceed with such suit, appeal and application.
Section 5 allows extension of prescribed limitation period in certain cases on sufficient cause
being shown for the delay. This is known as doctrine of sufficient cause. However, this
provision applies only to an appeal or an application. It cannot be invoked in relation to a suit
or plaint. Hence, Amar cannot be granted any extension of time.

Question No:2

On the last day of the limitation, when A was going to the court to present the plaint, he
met with an accident. Consequently, he remained unconscious for ten days in a hospital.
After discharge from the hospital, A submitted the plaint. He also made a prayer for
condonation of delay on the ground that there was sufficient cause for non-presentation
of the plaint within the period of limitation. Will the court accept his prayer?

According to Section 3, any suit, appeal or application if made beyond the prescribed period
of limitation, it is the duty of the Court not to proceed with such suit, appeal and application.
Section 5 allows extension of prescribed limitation period in certain cases on sufficient cause
being shown for the delay. This is known as doctrine of sufficient cause. However, this
provision applies only to an appeal or an application. It cannot be invoked in relation to a suit
or plaint. Hence, A cannot be granted any extension of time.

BARRING REMEDY NOT RIGHT

The law of limitation bars the remedy, but does not extinguish the right. Discuss.

The Law of limitation is based on equitable principle that equity helps the diligent and not the
indolent. It induces the claimants to be prompt in claiming the relief. The law of limitation
bars the remedy only after the limitation period has expired, but it does not extinguish a right
on which the suit has to be based. In all personal actions the right subsists although the
remedy is no longer available. If, therefore, a creditor, whose debt becomes statute barred,
has any means of realizing and enforcing claim by any method except by a suit, the
Limitation Act does not prevent him from recovering his debt by such means. Thus, if a time
barred debt is settled outside the Court, it is not illegal. If the debtor without being aware of
bar of time pays debt, he cannot sue the creditor to refund the money paid to him on the
ground of recovery being time barred.

Example: Ram owes Shyam a sum of Rs. 2,00,000. The debt is barred because of the law of
limitation. The Court shall dismiss the suit if filed by Shyam for the recovery of the debt after
the period of limitation (i.e. after 3 years). However, if Ram pays Shyam the amount even
after the same has become barred, the payment would be a valid one.

Question No:3

A failed to file a suit within the period of limitation against B for recovery of a loan of
Rs. 1,00,000 advanced by A to B. Being ignorant of the fact that the suit has gone time-
barred, B makes payment of the loan amount to A. When B came to know this fact, he
started proceedings for recovery of this money from A on the ground that payment was
made by mistake. Will he succeed?

The Law of limitation is based on equitable principle that equity helps the diligent and
not the indolent. It induces the claimants to be prompt in claiming the relief. The law of
limitation bars the remedy only after the limitation period has expired, but it does not
extinguish a right on which the suit has to be based. Thus, if a time barred debt is settled
outside the Court, it is not illegal. If the debtor without being aware of bar of time pays debt,
he cannot sue the creditor to refund the money paid to him on the ground of recovery being
time barred. Hence, if B pays A the amount after the same has become barred, the payment
would be a valid one and B cannot recover money paid to A on the ground that payment was
made by mistake.

CONTINUOUS RUNNING OF TIME

"Once a period of limitation starts, it cannot be stopped". Comment.

Time for limitation runs when the cause of action accrues. However, certain exceptions were
provided in Sections 4 to 8. Section 4 provides that if the period prescribed expires on a day
when the Court is closed, the application etc, may be made on the day, the Court reopens. As
per Section 5 condonation of delay is allowed on sufficient grounds. Sections 6, 7 & 8 allow
extension of time in certain cases of disability.
Continuous running of time [Section 9]: Once a period of limitation starts no subsequent
disability or inability can stop it. The applicability of Section 9 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.

Section 9 applies when the cause of action or right to move the Court continues to exist on
the date of making the application. Thus, the time runs, when the cause of action accrues.
Thus, once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability stops it.

Question No:4

A borrows Rs. 500 from B payable on demand. B dies a month after this leaving C, a
minor son, as his heir and legal representative. C sues A for this money within a year of
his attaining majority, but more than five years after the date of the loan. The period of
limitation is three years from the date of the loan. Will A succeed?

Heena gave a loan of Rs. 30,000 to Suman payable on demand. After 2 years Heena dies
leaving Nakshed, a minor son, as her heir and legal representative. Nakshed sues
Suman for recovery of money within one month of attaining majority hot than Ramesh
owed Rs. 50,000 to Brijesh on a bond which fell due on 1st January, 2012. Brijesh died
in an accident on 30th June, 2013 without having brought any suit, and was succeeded
by his son Mohan of 12 years of age. Is Mohan entitled to any extension of time because
of his minority?

Section 9 states that, once time begins to run no subsequent disability or inability can stop to
institute a suit or make an application. In this case, the period of limitation is to run from the
date of loan as loan is payable on demand. There is no disability at that time and time has
begun to run from the date of loan itself. Subsequent disability i.e. the son was minor have no
use. The limitation period in this case will end after 3 years from the date of loan whereas the
C has filed suit after attaining majority i.e. after the end of limitation period. Hence, the suit
is not maintainable.

Question No:5

Bhuvan owed money to Aman on a bond which fell due in 2009. Aman died in 2010
without having brought any suit and was succeeded by Chaman, his 14 years old son. Is
Chaman entitled to any extension of time on account of his minority?
Section 9 states that, once time begins to run no subsequent disability or inability can stop to
institute a suit or make an application. In this case, the period of limitation is to run from
2009. There is no disability at that time and time has begun to run from 2009. Subsequent
disability i.e. the son was minor have no use. The limitation period in this case will end after
3 years from 2009 i.e. in year 2012. In the given problem, Chaman is not entitled to any
extension of time on account of his minority.

COMPUTATION OF PERIOD OF LIMITATION

Limitation period for different types of suits, appeal and application: Students are
advised to see the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963. Summary of limitation period
prescribed in the Schedule is given below:

Cases Limitation
Suits relating to accounts 3 years
Suits relating to contracts 3 years
Suits relating to declarations 3 years
Suits relating to decrees and instruments 3 years
Suit by a mortgagor to redeem or recover the possession of immovable property 30 years
mortgaged
Suit by a mortgagee for foreclosure 30 years
Other suits relating to immovable property 12 years
Suits relating to movable property 3 years
Suits relating to tort (i.e. for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, libel, 1 year
slander)
Suits relating to tort (Suit by executors' administrators or representatives under the 2 years
Indian Fatal Accidents Act, 1855; Under the Legal Representatives' Suits Act, 1855,
against an executor, an administrator or any other representative.)
Other suits relating to tort 3 years
Suits relating to trusts and trust property 12 years
limitation period prescribed for the following cases

1) For Compensation for libel Suit

2) For specific performance of a contract to an immovable property
3) Suits relating to possession of immovable property mortgaged
4) For possession of an immovable property
5) For arrears of rent
6) By a surety against principal debtors
7) Suits relating to contract Suits relating to movable property
8) Suits for an account and share of profits of a dissolved partnership

The limitation period prescribed for the various cases is as follows:

Cases Limitation For Compensation for libel Suit 1 year

For specific performance of a contract to an immovable property 4 years
Suits relating to possession of immovable property mortgaged 12 years
For possession of an immovable property 12 years
For arrears of rent 3 years
By a surety against principal debtors 3 years
Suits relating to contract 3 years
Suits relating to movable property 3 years
Suits for an account and share of profits of a dissolved partnership 3 years

Indicate period of limitation for filing a suit in respect of the following:

1. Wages to a seaman
2. Wages due to other employees
3. Price of food or drink sold by the keeper of a hotel, tavern or lodging house
4. Compensation for false imprisonment
5. Compensation for malicious prosecution

The limitation period prescribed for the various cases is as follows:

Cases Limitation Wages to a seaman 3 years

Wages due to other employees 3 years
Price of food or drink sold by the keeper of a hotel, tavern or lodging house 3 years
Compensation for false imprisonment 1 year
Compensation for malicious prosecution 1 year

Lmitation period prescribed for the following cases

1. For specific performance of a contract

2. For possession of an immovable property
3. For leave to appear and defend a suit under 10 days summary procedure

The limitation period prescribed for the various cases is as follows:

Cases Limitation
For specific performance of a contract 3 years
To enforce payment of money secured by a mortgage 12 years
For possession of an immovable property 12 years
For leave to appear and defend a suit under summary procedure 10 days

Whether the Limitation Act, 1963 apply to a proceeding under Article 32 or 226 of the
Constitution

The State cannot place any hindrance by prescribing a period of limitation in the way
of an aggrieved person seeking to approach the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of
the Constitution. The Limitation Act, 1963 does not in terms apply to a proceeding under
Article 32 or Article 226 of the Constitution.

Question No:6

Star Hotel arranged food etc., for a marriage party of Richie consisting of 60 persons on
30th June, 2010 at the rate of Rs. 200 per person. Rs. 10,000 remained unpaid. Advise
Star Hotel about the period of limitation.

The Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 specifies the limitation period for filing
suits and also state the date from which limitation period start to run. According First
Division Part II which deals with "Suits relating contracts" limitation period for suits for the
price of food or drink sold by the keeper of a hotel, tavern or lodging-house is 3 years and the
limitation period starts from date when the food or drink is delivered. If Star Hotel wishes to
bring a suit, the limitation period will start from next day i.e. from 1st July 2010. Thus, Star
Hotel is advised to bring suit within 3 years from 1st July, 2010.

Period is excluded while computing the period of limitation

The law of limitation bars the remedy in a court of law when the period of limitation
has expired. However, there are certain exclusions in the computation of the period of
limitation. Explain.

Computation of period of limitation for an appeal or an application for leave to appeal.

The Limitation Act, 1963 makes specific provisions for exclusion of certain time in some
cases for computation of the prescribed period. These provisions are as follows:

1. 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)]
2. The day on which the judgement complained or 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)]
3. The time required for obtaining a copy of the judgement on which the decree or order is
founded shall also be excluded. [Section 12(3)]
4. The time required for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. [Section 12(4)]
5. The time during which the applicant has been prosecuting in good faith, his application
for "leave to sue or appeal as a pauper is applied for", shall be excluded. [Section 13]
6. Civil proceeding relating to the matter in issue had been initiated in a Court which is
unable to entertain it, by lack of jurisdiction or by any other like cause shall be excluded.
[Section 14]
7. Exclusion of time in certain other cases [Sections 15 & 16]:
 If suit or application for the execution of a decree had been stayed by an injunction or
order then such period of injunction shall be excluded.
 Time required for obtaining the sanction/consent of the Government shall be
excluded.
  The time during which the defendant has been absent from India and from the
territories outside India but administered by the Central Government, shall be
excluded.
 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.

Question No:7

A customs officer wishes to appeal in the Supreme Court against the judgement of the
High Court. He could obtain certified copy of the judgement of the High Court after a
period of 8 months whereas time limitation to file such an appeal is 90 days. Is the
appeal barred by limitations? Give reasons.

The appeal is not barred by limitation. In computing the period of limitation for an appeal the
time requisite for obtaining a certified copy of judgement should be excluded. [Section 12(3)]
Keeping in view above provision time taken by customs officer (i.e. 8 months) should be
excluded while computing the period of limitation. Thus, the limitation period starts, when
certified copy has been obtained by customs officer.

Question No:8

An appeal has to be filed in the High Court within the period of limitation which is 90
days from the date of decree. The decree was passed on 6.1.2010. Application for
certified copies of judgement and decree was made on 28.1.2010 and the certified copies
were ready for delivery on 23.2.2010, but the delivery thereof was taken on 26.2.2010.
What is the last date of limitation for filing the appeal?

The following period is excluded in computing the period of limitation prescribed for
an appeal.

 Day on which the period begins to run.

 Day on which judgement was pronounced.

Month Explanation Days Cumulative

Days
Jan 2010 6th Jan will be excluded as day on which the period begins 21 21
to run shall be excluded. Thus, limitation period counting
will start on 7th Jan. Time required for obtaining
decree/certified copies shall be excluded hence days from
28th Jan to 23rd Feb will be excluded.
Feb 2010 Counting will start when certified copies were ready for 5 26
delivery i.e. from 24.2.2010.

Mar 2010 No period will be excluded. 31 57

April 2010 No period will be excluded. 30 87

May 2010 As 87 days has been completed 90 days will complete on

3rd May which will be the last day for filing appeal.
 Time required for obtaining decree/certified copies.

In the given problem, the date of decree is 6.1.2010. Application for certified copies was filed
on 28.1.2010 and the certified copies were ready for delivery on 23.2.2010. Thus, appeal may
be filed by 3.5.2010.

EFFECT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Valid acknowledgement and its effect on the period of limitation
Effect of acknowledgement [Section 18]: Following requirements which should be present for a
valid acknowledgement:
(1) There must be admission or acknowledgement.
(2) Such acknowledgement must be of an existing liability in respect of a property or right.
(3) It must be made in writing and signed by the party against whom such property or right is
claimed, and
(4) It must be made before the expiry of period of limitation. If all the above conditions are
satisfied, a fresh period of limitation shall be computed from the time when the
acknowledgement was signed.

Question No:9
A advanced a loan of Rs. 10,000 to B. Before the expiry of the period of limitation for
filing a suit for recovery of this loan, B gave a letter duly signed by him to A in which B
stated that he was indebted to A for Rs. 10,000, but that he will not repay this debt. Can
this letter be treated as an acknowledgement?
[Section 18] of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with the effect of acknowledgement of
liability in respect of any property or right on the period of limitation. As per this Section an
acknowledgement must be in writing and signed by the person giving acknowledgement.
Further it must be given before expiry of period of limitation. As per the facts mentioned in
problem all the requirements of Section 18 has been duly complied with, hence the letter
written by B to A is a valid acknowledgement.

Question No:10
Before expiry of the period of limitation to pay a debt, debtor Raja in a birthday party
makes a declaration in loud words that he has to repay a loan of Rs. 3,00,000 to Prem.
Will Prem get a fresh period of limitation from the date of this declaration?
[Section 18] of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with the effect of acknowledgement of
liability in respect of any property or right on the period of limitation. As per this Section an
acknowledgement must in writing and signed by the person giving acknowledgement. Further
it must be given before expiry of period of limitation. In the given problem, debtor Raja has
made declaration orally and not in writing hence is not a valid acknowledgement.

Question No:11
Ashwani has taken of Rs. 5,000 as a loan from Bhushan and has promised to return the
loan amount within one year. Ashwani failed to return the loan amount within the
stipulated period, but he has written a letter to Bhushan that he would pay the amount
within a month. Whether the period of limitation will start after expiry of one year or
from the date when Bhushan received the letter? Give reasons.
[Section 18] of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with the effect of acknowledgement of liability
in respect of any property or right on the period of limitation. As per this Section an
acknowledgement must be in writing and signed by the person giving acknowledgement.
Further it must be given before expiry of period of limitation. In given case
acknowledgement is given within expiration of limitation period hence, if other condition
such as signing have completed then fresh period of limitation will start from the date of
signing the letter.

EFFECT OF PAYMENT OF DEBT OR INTEREST

Effect of payment of debt or interest
Effect of payment of debt or interest [Section 19]: 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 debt or 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 when part-payment
of debt is made by the debtor before the expiration of the period of limitation.

Question No:12
Ram owes money to Shyam against Bill No. 1657 dated 1st March, 2012; credit period 2
months. He makes only part payment on 6th April, 2014. Shyam wants to file a suit for
recovery of the balance of the amount on 1st April, 2015. Advise Shyam about the
limitation period to file the suit in the present case.
Limitation period for the present case is 3 years from the end of the credit period. Thus,
limitation period of 3 years will start from 1st May, 2012 and will end on 30th April 2015.
According to this Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963 a fresh period of limitation becomes
available to the creditor when part-payment of debt is made by the debtor before the
expiration of the period of limitation. As per facts given in case Ram has made part payment
on 6th April 2014 i.e. before the expiry of original limitation period hence a fresh period of
limitation of 3 years will start from 6th April, 2014. Since Shyam has made application
within one year from the date of 6th April 2014, the suit is maintainable.

Question No:13
On 31st December, 2007 Suresh took a loan of Rs. 10,000 from Umesh. He paid Rs.
2,000 to him on 16th June, 2011 towards part-payment. After that, Umesh did not
receive any amount from Suresh. Subsequently, Umesh instituted a suit for •
Limitation period for the present case is 3 years from the date of loan. Thus limitation period
will start from 1.1.2008 and will end on 31.12.2011. According to Section 19 of the
Limitation Act, 1963 a fresh period of limitation becomes available to the creditor when part-
payment of debt is made by the debtor before the expiration of the period of limitation. As
per facts given in case Suresh has made part payment on 16.6.2011 i.e. before the expiry of
original limitation period hence a fresh period of limitation of 3 years will start from
16.6.2011. Since, Umesh has made application within the 2 years from the date of 16.6.2011,
the suit is maintainable.

Question No:14
Arpit took a debt of Rs. 10,000 from Bharat on January, 1998 and promised to pay by
31st December, 2003. He could not pay such debt within the stipulated time. On 1st
December, 2006, Arpit paid Rs. 500 as interest against such debt to Bharat against
receipt. Bharat filed a suit against Arpit to recover such debt on 15th December, 2008.
Whether the suit filed by Bharat is within the period of limitation? Decide with reasons
citing relevant provisions of the law
Limitation period for the present case is 3 years from the end of the credit period. Thus,
limitation period of 3 years will start from 1st Jan, 2004 and will end on 31st Dec 2006.
According to Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963 a fresh period of limitation becomes
available to the creditor when part-payment of debt or interest is made by the debtor before
the expiration of the period of limitation.
As per facts given in case Arpit has paid interest on 1st Dec. 2006 i.e. before the expiry of
original limitation period hence a fresh period of limitation of 3 years will start from 1st Dec
2006. Since, Bharat has made application within two years from the date of 1st Dec 2006, the
suit is maintainable.