“Appeal arises from the Judgment of a Learned Single Judge of the High Court of Calcutta by which the Respondent’s Application for condoning a delay of 514 days in filing an Application under Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was allowed. This Court needs to assess whether the benefit of Sections 5 […]Read more "Section 34(3) of The Arbirtration Act I"
“The provision of limitation in The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 cannot be strictly construed to disadvantage, where a supplier of goods or services itself is instrumental in causing a delay in the settlement of the claim.” – Hon’ble Justice Madan B. Lokur, National Insurance v. Hindustan Safety Glass Works Ltd., [Civil Appeal No. 3883 of […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation X: Section 24A of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986"
Relevant Provisions: The Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 Revision to High Court – (1) Any dealer or other person, who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Appellate Tribunal, or the Commissioner may, within sixty days after being notified of the decision of the Appellate Tribunal, file a revision to the High Court; and […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation IX: Express Exclusion of Section 5 of The Limitation Act, 1963"
“The interpretation of the first part of Article 54 of Schedule 1 of The Limitation Act, 1963 is no longer res integra. In Ahmadsahab, (2009) 5 SCC 462 this Court considered the meaning of the word “date” and “fixed” appearing in Article 54… the Court held that the expression “date fixed for the performance” is […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation VIII: Article 54 of The Limitation Act, 1963"
Respondent entered into a contract for construction of a commercial complex. Certain disputes arose. The matter was referred to Arbitration. Sole Arbitrator passed an Award on 11.11.2010. Both parties appeared before Arbitrator. Arbitrator did not find any justification to allow any of the claims of Respondent-Contractor. Respondent believed he could take a somersault. That propelled […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation VII: Section 14 of The Limitation Act, 1963"
No Court or Tribunal can extend the period of limitation for filing a suit. Even if any cause, beyond the control of the plaintiff is shown also, the only extension is what is permitted under Section 4 of The Limitation Act, 1963, the period coming under Court holiday. Section 4 no doubt applies to suits […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation VI: Non-Working Saturdays"
As per Section 13(2)(a) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the period of limitation for filing a written statement before a District Forum is 45 days. In J.J. Merchant, (2002) 6 SCC 635 the question arose whether the Forum can grant time beyond 45 days to the opposite party for filing its version. The Three-Judge Bench answered […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation V: Written Statements, District Consumer Forums I"
My Lord, What is the meaning of the term ‘first learns’ as provided under Article 91(a) of The Limitation Act, 1963? “Article 91(a) of The Limitation Act reads: Description of Suit Period of Limitation Time from which period begins to run 91. For compensation – a) For wrongfully taking or detaining any specific movable property lost, […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation IV: “First Learns”"
“A series of decisions of this Court have clearly held that The Limitation Act, 1963 applies only to Courts and does not apply to Quasi-Judicial Bodies [See, (1976) 4 SCC 634]. There is authority for the proposition that even where Section 14 of The Limitation Act may not apply, the principles on which Section 14 is […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation III: Causes of Justice I"
“Unfortunately, there is no period of limitation prescribed by law within which a person aggrieved by the decision of the Governor under Article 192 can approach the High Court. Until such law is made, we deem it appropriate to hold that any person aggrieved by a decision of the Governor under Article 192 must approach the High […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation II: Article 192 of The Constitution"
Section 9A of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a State Amendment to The Code, inserted by Section 3 of The Maharashtra Act No. 65/1977. Section 9A is mandatory in nature. It mandates the Court to decide the jurisdiction of the Court before proceeding with a suit and granting interim relief by way of injunction. In Kamalakar Eknath Salunkhe v. […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation I: Section 9A of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908"