Power To Condone Delay Under Section 5 Of Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Suits : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that the power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to suits.

The Court also noted that Limitation Act is applicable in the State of Mizoram with effect from 21.01.1972.

Th limitation may harshly affect a particular party, but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari said while upholding a Gauhati High Court judgment.

In this case, a money suit seeking compensation for stones extracted by authorities from the land of the plaintiffs, for the construction of a public road, was filed. The Trial court rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code for rejection of the plaint, on the ground of limitation. Later, they filed another suit, along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay of 325 days in filing the said suit. This application came to be allowed by the Trial Court. Setting aside the said order, the Gauhati High Court held that the Limitation Act was applicable in the State of Mizoram and that Section 5 did not apply to suits, but only to appeals and to applications except for applications under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code.

Agreeing with the High Court, the Apex Court bench observed thus:

"As held by this Court in Popat Bahiru Govardhane & Others vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer & Anr. reported in (2013) 10 SCC 765, on which reliance has been placed by the High Court, it is settled law that limitation may harshly affect a particular party, but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes. The Court has no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds, even though the statutory provision may sometimes cause hardship or inconvenience to a particular party. The Court has no choice, but to enforce it giving full effect to the same"

The court also referred to the judgment in J. Thansiama vs. State of Mizoram to note that the Limitation Act applied in the State of Mizoram with effect from 21.01.1972. The bench observed:

"The High Court held rightly that the Limitation Act was applicable in the State of Mizoram and that a perusal of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 clearly showed that Section 5 did not apply to suits, but only to appeals and to applications except for applications under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code."

Headnotes

Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 does not apply to suits, but only to appeals and to applications except for applications under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code - Limitation may harshly affect a particular party, but it has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribes. The Court has no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds, even though the statutory provision may sometimes cause hardship or inconvenience to a particular party. The Court has no choice, but to enforce it giving full effect to the same.

Limitation Act, 1963 - Limitation Act applicable in the State of Mizoram with effect from 21.01.1972. [Referred to J. Thansiama vs. State of Mizoram & Others ].

Summary - Appeal against Gauhati High Court judgment which held that the Limitation Act was applicable in the State of Mizoram and that Section 5 did not apply to suits, but only to appeals and to applications except for applications under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code - Dismissed - The High Court rightly set-aside the impugned order of Trial Court holding that it could not have condoned the delay of 325 days in filing the Money Suit.

Case details

Case : F. Liansanga vs Union of India | SLP(Civil) 32875-32876 OF 2018 | 2 March 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 252

Coram: Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari

Click Here To Read/Download Order