Period of Limitation is excluded even for filing the Written Statement and in cases where Delay is not Condonable | Supreme Court Clarified

Supreme Court of India
Source: Supreme Court of India
  • Post author:
  • Post published:February 15, 2022
  • Reading time:7 mins read

The Supreme Court while hearing a Civil Appeal has once again clarified the issues with regard to the period of limitation and has observed that period envisaged finally in the Order dated 23.09.2021 is required to be excluded in computing the period of limitation even for filing the written statement and even in cases where the delay is otherwise not condonable.

The Court reiterated that the orders in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 were of extraordinary measures in extraordinary circumstances and their operation cannot be curtailed with reference to the ordinary operation of law.

The only issue before the Court was that whether the delay in filing the Written Statement in a suit filed under the Commercial Courts Act can be condoned by the Court or not in view of the Orders passed by this Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition no. 3 of 2020 during the Pandemic.

In the instant case, the Commercial Court had declined the prayer of the defendant-appellant for granting further time to file its written statement. The prayer of the defendant-appellant came to be declined on the ground that in view of the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as substituted by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, such a right of the defendant to file the written statement stood forfeited with expiry of 120 days from the date of service of summons. In appeal, the High Court upheld the Order of the trial Court which constrained the appellant to file the instant appeal.

Observations of the Court:

The Court while considering the issues raised in the appeal referred to its earlier Orders passed in SMWP No.3 of 2020:

“8. Therefore, we dispose of the M.A. No.665 of 2021 with the following directions: –

  1. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall become available with effect from 03.10.2021.
  2. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 03.10.2021. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 03.10.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
  3. The period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.
  4.  The Government of India shall amend the guidelines for containment zones, to state.
Also Read:  Land Revenue Act | Revision Petition filed at the instance of aggrieved party would attract the provisions of limitation: High Court of J&K and Ladakh

Regulated movement will be allowed for medical emergencies, provision of essential goods and services, and other necessary functions, such as, time bound applications, including for legal purposes, and educational and job-related requirements.”
(emphasis supplied)

Operation and effect of the orders passed in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 viz-a-viz the plea of the Appellant.

20. As regards the operation and effect of the orders passed by this Court in SMWP No. 3 of 2020, noticeable it is that even though in the initial order dated 23.03.2020, this Court provided that the period of limitation in all the proceedings, irrespective of that prescribed under general or special laws, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended w.e.f. 15.03.2020 but, while concluding the matter on 23.09.2021, this Court specifically provided for exclusion of the period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021. A look at the scheme of the Limitation Act, 1963 makes it clear that while extension of prescribed period in relation to an appeal or certain applications has been envisaged under Section 5, the exclusion of time has been provided in the provisions like Sections 12 to 15 thereof. When a particular period is to be excluded in relation to any suit or proceeding, essentially the reason is that such a period is accepted by law to be the one not referable to any indolence on the part of the litigant, but being relatable to either the force of circumstances or other requirements of law (like that of mandatory two months’ notice for a suit against the Government). The excluded period, as a necessary consequence, results in enlargement of time, over and above the period prescribed.

20.1: Having regard to the purpose for which this Court had exercised the plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and issued necessary orders from time to time in SMWP No. 3 of 2020, we are clearly of the view that the period envisaged finally in the order dated 23.09.2021 is required to be excluded in computing the period of limitation even for filing the written statement and even in cases where the delay is otherwise not condonable. It gets perforce reiterated that the orders in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 were of extraordinary measures in extraordinary circumstances and their operation cannot be curtailed with reference to the ordinary operation of law.

In other words, the orders passed by this Court on 23.03.2020, 06.05.2020, 10.07.2020, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021 in SMWP No. 3 of 2020 leave nothing to doubt that special and extraordinary measures were provided by this Court for advancing the cause of justice in the wake of challenges thrown by the pandemic; and their applicability cannot be denied in relation to the period prescribed for filing the written statement. It would be unrealistic and illogical to assume that while this Court has provided for exclusion of period for institution of the suit and therefore, a suit otherwise filed beyond limitation (if the limitation had expired between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021) could still be filed within 90 days from 03.10.2021 but the period for filing written statement, if expired during that period, has to operate against the defendant.

Therefore, in view of the orders passed by this Court in SMWP No. 3 of 2020, we have no hesitation in holding that the time limit for filing the written statement by the appellant in the subject suit did not come to an end on 06.05.2021.

Click here to download the Judgment

Also Read:  Summoning of the accused is a serious issue and magistrate cannot issue process mechanically: J&K High Court

Case Details:
Prakash Corporates vs. DEE VEE Projects Limited
Civil Appeal No: 1318 of 2022
Coram: Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Vikram Nath
Date of Judgment: 14-02-2022