Introduction

The law of limitation sets maximum time periods within which legal proceedings can be initiated in courts of law. The key objectives behind limitation laws are:

• To ensure timely adjudication of claims without unreasonable delay.
• To prevent witnesses being called upon to give evidence after lengthy periods.
• To prevent disturbance of settled rights and titles.
• To discourage laxity and promote diligence.

The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 lays down limitation periods for different classes of civil suits. It stipulates the time limits within which the plaintiff must institute a civil suit before the right to sue becomes time barred. Limitation law balances the interests of the plaintiff to have a reasonable time to pursue claims, and the defendant’s right to not be prosecuted on stale claims.

Law of Limitation

The law of limitation is enshrined under Entry 13 of the Concurrent List in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. The Limitation Act, 1963 is a central legislation prescribing limitation periods for suits, appeals and applications across statutes. It consolidates the law relating to limitation of suits, appeals and certain applications. Section 3 provides that subject to provisions of any special law, every suit shall be instituted within the prescribed period under the schedule to the Act.

Section 4 of the Limitation Act states that any suit for which no period of limitation is prescribed elsewhere shall be governed by the residuary Article 113 which provides for three years limitation. The starting point of limitation is when the right to sue accrues. As per Section 2(j) of CPC, the right to sue accrues when the wrong is done, breach of contract occurs, default happens, or the claim matures. Time begins running when plaintiff acquires knowledge of the right to sue. 

The CPC incorporates limitation provisions under Order II Rule 2 and Schedule I in conformity with the Limitation Act. The First Schedule under CPC prescribes limitation periods for suits relating to accounts, contracts, declaratory decrees, mortgages, immovable property, movable property, trusts, compensation, etc. Periods range from one year to twelve years.

Computation of Periods of Limitation

As per Section 4 of Limitation Act, any period of limitation is to be calculated excluding the day when the cause of action arises. If the last day falls on a holiday, limitation will be extended to next working day. Section 12 provides that in computing limitation, time requisite to obtain copies of decrees, instruments or orders may be excluded. Period from making an application for appointment of guardian to the date of appointment may be excluded under Section 12(2).

Section 14 excludes any time during which plaintiff is prosecuting another civil proceeding with diligence and good faith. Where proceedings are prosecuted in wrong court, Section 14(2) excludes time in certain suits. Period of defendant’s absence from India may be excluded under Section 17 if right to sue arose when defendant was out of India. Limitation remains suspended when summons is served on defendant during last few days of limitation under Section 18.    

Extension/Condonation of Limitation

The CPC empowers the court under Section 5 to admit suits instituted after expiry of limitation if the plaintiff satisfies that he had sufficient cause for not filing the suit within time. The delay in filing suit must have been due to reasons beyond plaintiff’s control, and he acted with reasonable diligence under the circumstances. Plaintiff must make out a strong case of compelling circumstances which impeded the institution of suit within limitation. Physical inability, mental illness, involuntary detention, emergency travel, fraudulent concealment, breakdown of services/communication etc. have been held as sufficient causes.

Section 151 of CPC also preserves inherent powers of the court to make orders necessary for ends of justice, which includes condoning delay. However, discretion under Sections 5 and 151 must be exercised judiciously. The plaintiff must demonstrate that injustice would be caused if delay is not condoned. Long delays cannot be condoned merely on technical grounds when no genuine effort is made to explain inaction consistently over long periods.

Doctrine of Equitable Principles

Under doctrine of equitable principles, even though legal limitation has expired, the court may grant relief to the plaintiff to avoid injustice and hardship. The doctrine is based on principles of equity, good conscience and fairness. It considers extenuating circumstances which impeded filing of the suit within time, but exigencies of justice require the court to adjudicate the matter despite the bar of limitation.

However, the doctrine of equitable principles can be applied only in exceptional and deserving cases. The plaintiff must make out a compelling case that grave miscarriage of justice would be caused unless delay is condoned. The negligence, inaction or default of the plaintiff himself cannot be a ground for invoking the doctrine of equitable principles. The court must exercise great caution in extending limitation on equitable grounds to prevent stale claims being brought before the court.

Effect of Limitation

Order VII Rule 1 of CPC requires the plaint to disclose that the suit is within limitation. Under Order VII Rule 11(d), the plaint can be rejected when the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law. If the defendant satisfies the court that the suit is barred by limitation, the court shall dismiss the suit under Order XII Rule 3.

The limitation defence can be taken as a preliminary issue under Order XIV. The defendant may also take out a chamber summons for summary judgment on ground of limitation under Order 37. If the plaintiff’s claim is found barred by limitation, the court will pass a decree dismissing the suit. A time-barred claim cannot be enforced by a court of law even if the claim is genuine on merits. However, limitation does not destroy the underlying right which remains alive though unenforceable in court.

Extension of Limitation

Parliament is authorised to make temporary provisions extending limitation under Article 31A of Limitation Act. Such extension applies to suits, appeals or applications where limitation expires during the period specified in the order. Extension of limitation by notification applies uniformly across the country. State governments can also extend limitation by notification under Section 3. Several states have extended limitation to alleviate hardships during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The exercise of power to extend limitation is not arbitrary but guided by policy. Extension enables access to justice in situations where adherence to original limitation would cause hardship and detriment to rights. It balances individual rights along with exigencies of public welfare in exceptional circumstances. Extension allows pending claims to be prosecuted after temporary suspension of limitation. However, it cannot revive dead or time-barred claims which already extinguished by efflux of time before such extension.

Continuing/Successive Wrongs

In certain instances, like continuing wrong or recurring breach, a fresh cause of action arises on each default which triggers fresh limitation. In cases of successive or recurring wrongs like nuisance, trespass, there is a fresh infringing action which constitutes a new injury. Each act or breach causing damage amounts to a distinct cause of action for purposes of limitation.

For example, in case of monthly tenancy, failure to vacate gives rise to a separate cause of action at the end of each month. The suit can be filed within limitation computed from the date of breach in each month. But once limitation expires qua any particular act, no suit can be entertained for that default even if later acts are within limitation.  

Amendments Relating Back to Date of Filing

As per Order VI Rule 17, the court has discretion to allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of proceedings to avoid multiplicity of litigation. Where the original pleading was filed within limitation, any amendment sought subsequently will normally relate back to the original filing date. The amendment will not be time-barred despite limitation having expired after suit filing if the court allows the amendment relating it back to the initial filing date. However, relation back principle does not apply if a new cause of action is permitted to be added or substituted through amendment outside limitation. The court will disallow such amendment to prevent re-agitation of dead claims by circumventing the law of limitation. Subject to this, bonafide amendments are allowed to relate back to avoid limitation technicalities coming in the way of adjudication on merits.