Introduction:
The word limitation itself tells the meaning i.e. restriction or limiting rule. In legal terms, it’s a legally stipulated period beyond which an action could be defeated or ownership will not continue. The Law of Limitation is extracted from two legal maxims of Roman Law i.e. interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium means ‘in the interest of the state there should be a limit to litigation’ and vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniut means ‘the law assists those who are vigilant with their rights, and not those who sleep on their rights’. The fundamental concept of limitation is pertained with fixing or prescribing the duration for barring legal actions.
As per Section 2 (j) of the Limitation Act, 1963, ‘period of limitation’ means the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by the Schedule, and ‘prescribed period’ means the period of limitation computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act.
Prior to 1859, there wasn’t any uniformity in the law of limitation. Various directives, pertinent
to the Company’s Courts handling certain areas falling within the limitation law, were enforced in the Mofussil of the three Presidencies. For the Courts instituted by the Royal Charter in the Presidency towns, English law was applicable. To bring homogeneity in law, the Limitation Act was passed in 1859 and enforced in 1862.[1] The Limitation Act has 32 Sections and 137 Articles.[2] The articles are organized into 10 parts.
Scope
The Limitation Act concentrates on speeding up the procedure of justice. The fundamental concept is to repair or prescribe the duration for barring legal actions. The act stipulates the deadline for several suits within, which an aggrieved individual can go to the court for remedy or justice. All the legal actions taken after the limitation period are time-barred by this law.
The act doesn’t make any racial or religious distinction since family law is additionally under limitation law as per the prevailing statute. This statue focuses on the overall welfare of the public by seeking remedy in time.
In RAJENDER SINGH V. SANTA SINGH, AIR 1973 SC 2537, the Supreme Court of India passed the judgment that the objective of the law of limitation is to prohibit obstacles or denial of what has been acquired in justice and equity by an extended enjoyment or what a party may have lost by its inaction and ignorance.
Effect of Limitation Law
To understand the effect let us first focus on the example-
Amit, an affluent businessman, lends ₹ 5 lakhs to Bunty, a retailer for three years on 1st January 2020. So, the maturity date of repayment will be 1st January 2023. Bunty didn’t pay the loan amount on the agreed date and Amit didn’t demand his money. Now, the repayment date has expired.
On 1st January 2030, Amit suffered an enormous business loss and his company went bankrupt. So, he made a list of people to whom he lent the cash and found that Bunty hasn’t paid him his ₹ 5 lakhs. He contacted Bunty regarding the repayment of the loan and Bunty didn’t agree to it. Amit further visited his advocate for taking legal action against Bunty. The advocate denied helping him in taking the action because the limitation period has expired.
Now, the question arises why the advocate said no to taking any action even if Amit has a right?
We all know that the law says, “Where there’s a right, there’s a remedy”, but in the scenario, Amit gave up his right himself in this situation. The remedy here is for a limited period because the law helps people conscious of their rights and not those who sleep on it. He didn’t exercise his right, so there isn’t any right to remedy for him. Therefore, he can’t file a suit. He is entitled to recover his money and he can himself demand his money from Bunty, but the Court won’t help him. Amit should have brought action within 3 years from the date of the debt becoming due for repayment.
So, we can conclude that:
- The limitation law doesn’t destroy the substantive right of a person.
- It simply puts a restriction on the remedy only.
- It doesn’t extinguish the title.
- It is on the complainant to prove that the proceeding instituted is within the limitation period.[3]
Can this Law be used as a Pretext of Defense?
As per Section 3 of the Act, during the case proceeding, albeit the defendant doesn’t mention that the suit is barred by limitation, the Court will observe this as a ground of defense and dismiss the case. Even in the absence of fixation of a limitation period, the Court will assess the duration and accept or reject the case accordingly.
In GOVERNMENT OF INDIA V. VEDANTA LIMITED,[4] the Apex Court held that the petition for the imposition of a foreign arbitral award was filed within 3 years from the date when the right to apply for the petition accrued which is correct as per the Limitation Act, 1936.
Expiration of Limitation Period
As per Section 4 of the Limitation Act, where the stipulated period for any suit, appeal, or application expires on the date when the court is closed, the suit, appeal or application shall commence on the date when the Court reopens.
Under What Circumstances The Duration of Limitation Is Often Extended?
Section 6 and 7 of the Act gives an individual privilege to take legal action in the Court for legal remedy after the expiration of the Limitation period in case :
- An individual is below 18 years of age
- He/she is an insane person
- An idiot
He/she can file for a suit after his disability is cured and his limitation period will start from the date his disability ceased.
If an individual has more than one disability then he/she can file a suit or make an appeal on the date when all his/her disabilities are ceased.
The Honourable Supreme Court of India increased the limitation duration from March 15, 2020, for all cases under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Negotiable Instruments Act.
The Court used its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution to increase the duration because of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.[5]
Effect of Death
As per Section 16 of the Act, if an individual dies then his/her legal representative can file the case or make an application, in the same way, the dead individual would have filed if he/she was alive. The calculation of the limitation period will begin from the date there’s a legal representative of the deceased or when the representative is capable of doing so.
Effect of Fraud or Mistake
Section 17 of the Act points out that if the suit or application is predicated upon fraud or concealment of the facts or mistake, then the calculation of the limitation period will begin from the date when such fraud or mistake is identified. But such suit or application or appeal should be filed within one year from the date of disclosure of the fraud or mistake.
In AKHTAR SHAKEEL V. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, 2020[6] the Apex Court quashed a criminal case of fraud and breach of trust wherein the entire allegation was predicated upon contractual breach and the suit was filed to overcome the limitation for a civil suit.
Acquisition of Easements by Prescription
If an individual has been enjoying the access and use of air, light to any building or property with easement without any interruption and for twenty years then, he/she shall have a privilege to do so. As per Section 25 of the Limitation Act, if there is a discontinuance of the possession or enjoyment because of obstruction by the act of some other individual other than the claimant, then the suit must be filed within two years from the date on which the hindrance was made with regard to the usage of a particular area. Where the Government is utilizing the area, the government will have to prove that it was used for thirty years.
Adverse Possession
Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963 specifies the ceasement of right to property. It is an exception to the principle of the limitation of law.
In KARNATAKA BOARD OF WAQF V. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, 2004,[7] the Court held that the real owner would be considered to be in possession of the said property so long as there is no intrusion. Non-usage of property for a long duration won’t affect the title of the holder but the position will be changed when another individual will take the possession and claim right over it and file a suit against the real owner.
Article 64 and 65 of this Act, establish the law of adverse possession. Adverse Possession is a legal theory under which an individual who is the holder of a property owned by another can gain the ownership on the fulfillment of certain conditions for a duration defined in the statutes of that particular jurisdiction.
Article 64 deals in the dispute with the possession of the immovable property and not on title.
The computation of the limitation period begins from the date the complainant was dispossessed. Article 64 deals with the possession of immovable property or any interest-based on the title. The limitation date is computed from the date when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the complainant.
Both the articles provide twelve years within which the case is to be filed
after that, the right will be extinguished.
When No Duration Is Specified
Article 113 of Part X of the Limitation Act is a remainder article. It talks about the non-specification of the period of limitation. In this situation, the limitation period begins from the date when the right to sue accrues and the suit must be filed within the three years from when the right arises.
Conclusion
The fundamental aim of the law of Limitation is to provide fast and reasonable justice. It helps in the avoidance of the cases brought by ignorant citizens and helps in providing the legal remedy to people aware of their rights. This law recognizes the privilege of the ignorant but doesn’t provide remedies.
References:
[1] https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/51-100/report89.pdf
[2] https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/bareacts/limitation/index.php?Title=Limitation%20Act,%201963
[3] https://www.slideshare.net/DrVikasKhakare/indian-limitation-act-1963
[4] Civil Appeal No. 3185, 2020
[5] https://www.bloombergquint.com/law-and-policy/supreme-court-extends-period-of-limitation-for-cases- under-arbitration-act-negotiable-instruments-act
[6] https://www.latestlaws.com/latest-news/fraud-case-quashed/
[7] 10 SCC 779 https://www.thelawmentor.org/post/overview-indian-limitation-act-1963
0 Comments