TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he concept of extension in cognizance of extension of limitation, it was held that the said judgment extended the period of limitation and did not extend period upto which the delay could be condoned in exercise of discretion conferred by the statute concerned. In that case, the Supreme Court upheld the refusal of the tribunal to condone the delay in the context of Section 421(3) and Section 420(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, in respect of the application for condonation of delay and dismissal of appeal. In the facts of the present case, the written statement was not filed by the defendant within the limitation period of thirty days which expired on 28.2.2020. The benefit of extended period of limitation as per the Supreme Court order would not be available to the defendant. Petition allowed. - R/Special Civil Application No. 13627 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 24-12-2021 - N.V. Anjaria And Sandeep N. Bhatt, JJ. For the Appellant : Abhisst K. Thaker For the Respondents : A. H. Mohapatra JUDGMENT N.V. Anjaria, J. 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Abhisst Thaker for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. A.H. Mohapatra for the respondent. 2. The petitioner b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s inserted by way of substitution: Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the written statement on such other day, as may be specified by the court, for reasons to be recorded in writing and on payment of such costs as the Court deems fit, but which shall not be later than one hundred and twenty days from the date of service of summons and on expiry of one hundred and twenty days from the date of service of summons, the defendant shall forfeit the right to file the written statement and the court shall not allow the written statement to be taken on record. 3.2.2 This was re-emphasized by re-inserting yet another proviso in Order VIII Rule 10 CPC, reading as under:- Procedure when party fails to present written statement called for by Court.- Where any party from whom a written statement is required under Rule 1 or Rule 9 fails to present the same within the time permitted or fixed by the Court, as the case may be, the Court shall pronounce judgment against him, or make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit and on pronouncement of such judgment a dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from 15.3.2020. The suo motu proceedings were finally disposed of by order dated 8.3.2021 in which the Supreme Court issued the final directions. 1. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall become available with effect from 15.03.2021. 2. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 15.03.2021. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 15.03.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply. 3. The period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 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( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of India shall amend the guidelines for containment zones, to state. 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. 5. In view of the above orders of the Supreme Court, the period from 15.3.2020 till 2.10.2021 was the period during which the limitation was extended, the balance period of limitation remaining on 15.3.2021 would become available to the litigant from 3.10.2021. In those cases, where the limitation expired within the aforesaid period, that is from 15.3.2020 to 2.10.2021, the uniform extension of ninety days was permitted. The total position emerges by virtue of the above orders was that if in given case, limitation in respect of the filing of any proceedings was to expire on 15.3.2020 or thereafter, the period of such limitation stood extended as above. In other words, in the case where the limitation to do any act or to file any proceedings expire on 15.3.2020 or on subsequent date, the benefit of extending period would become available. If the limitation period for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, from this standpoint also the filing of written statement by the defendant was even after one hundred twenty days. 6.2. The High Court of Calcutta in Siddha Real Estate Development Private Limited Vs. Golden Goenka Credit Private Limited in IA No. GA 2 of 2020 in CS No. 246 of 2019 decided on 24.12.2020, correctly explained the working of period of limitation under Order VIII Rule 1. In light and in context of the orders of the Supreme Court extending the limitation during the pandemic period, the Delhi High Court stated that, In order to ascertain if the defendant can take recourse to the Supreme Court Order of 23rd March, 2020 by which the limitation period in a large number of actions was extended with effect from 15th March, 2020 till further orders, the said order has to be read in conjunction with the later order of the Supreme Court of 18th September, 2020. Paragraph 19 of the order of 18th September, 2020 clarifies the earlier order of 23rd March, 2020 in the following manner: 19. But we do not think that the appellants can take refuge under the above order. What was extended by the above order of this Court was only the period of limitation and not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) and Section 420(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, in respect of the application for condonation of delay and dismissal of appeal. The prayer for condonation of delay by placing reliance of order of the Supreme Court in Cognizance For Extension of Limitation in re, was declined. 8.1. Quoting the extracted observations of the Supreme Court, We do not think that the appellants can take refuge under the above order. What was extended by the above order of this Court was only the period of limitation and not the period upto which delay can be condoned in exercise of discretion conferred by the statute. The above order passed by this Court was intended to benefit vigilant litigants who were prevented due to the pandemic and the lockdown, from initiating proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed by general or special law. It is needless to point out that the law of limitation finds its root in two latin maxims, one of which is 'Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt' which means that the law will assist only those who are vigilant about their rights and not those who sleep over them. 9. As noticed, above, in the facts of the present case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
