An Analysis of Doctrine of Condonation of Delay

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Understanding the Doctrine of Condonation of Delay as an exception to The Limitation Act, 1963.
• The important terms used in the doctrine.
• Essential features, conditions and exceptions to the Doctrine of Condonation of Delay.

INTRODUCTION

The Limitation Act, 1963 has prescribed a certain time limit for any petition to be filed, ignoring which can lead to the extinguishment of the remedies which are to be provided to the aggrieved party. The doctrine of condonation of delay mentioned in the limitation act acts as an exception to such prescribed limitation periods as it states that "if an aggrieved party is able to present the 'sufficient cause' for causing a delay in institution of the suit then the court may upon its discretion can reject or 'condone the delay' and may proceed with the proceedings of the case so that the aggrieved parties could be provided with the reliefs claimed by them".

THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963

The Limitation Act, 1963 is a legislation which governs the time period within which a suit is to be instituted. The act also lays down the provisions for the situations where a suit has not been filed within the period prescribed by the legislation. It is to be noted here that the legislation extinguishes only the remedies to be provided to the parties not the right to file delayed documents in court. Thus, we can say that the main purpose of the act is to prevent litigation from being dragged for a long time and quick disposal of cases which leads to effective litigation.

As of now, the act contains 32 sections and 137 articles which are further divided into 10 parts. Section 2(j) of the act defines 'period of limitation' as "the time prescribed by the schedule to institute any suit, appeal or application" and 'prescribed period' as "the period of limited determined as per the provisions of the act".

MEANING OF LIMITATION

The term limitation in general means "restriction or the rule or circumstances which are limited", which means that the circumstances under which legal remedy is obtained is barred by time as per the law. In other words, we can say that the law of limitation specifically prescribes a particular time limit during which an aggrieved party shall approach the court to receive the legal remedy and after the prescribed period, no court shall have the jurisdiction to try a suit or entertain an application or appeal, if it is filed after the prescribed period.

OBJECTIVE AND APPLICABILITY OF THE LIMITATION ACT

As stated above, the primary objective of the limitation act is to set the bar on the duration within which a litigant can institute a suit. Earlier, the act was not applicable to the state of Jammu and Kashmir, but now as per the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019. The act is exhaustive in nature. Ordinarily, the act applies only to civil cases except for the matters specified for that purpose. Moreover, since the law of limitation is procedural in nature it will also be applied retrospectively.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES UNDER THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963

The Limitation Act, 1963 works on the principle of two legal maxims, which can be stated as follows-

• Interest Republicae Ut Sit Finis Litium;which means 'for the public interest, litigation must come to an end'.
• Vigilantibus Non Dormentibus Jura Subvenient;whose literal meaning is that 'the court protect those who are vigilant about their own rights'.

MEANING OF CONDONATION

The literal meaning of the term condonation means "voluntary overlooking or pardon of an offense (expressly or impliedly) and the proceedings of the court shall take place in the manner as if no offence has been committed. Thus, here the term in the doctrine is to ignore the law of period as prescribed by the act.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE DOCTRINE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY

The Supreme Court in the case of the Collector Land Acquisition vs. MstKatiji[ 1987 (167) ITR 471]laid down some principles which are to be followed while administering the doctrine of condonation of delay

• A plaintiff cannot always be entitled to get benefits by filing a late plaint/appeal.
• Denial of condonation of delay by the court may result in the dismissal of a meritorious matter, and if the delay is condoned, the case will be heard based on merits, which means that a decision is ruled out as per the evidence instead of the technical and procedural ground.
• The phrase "every day's delay is needed to be justified" must not be applied in a literal way but in a reasonable way.
• The option between substantial justice and technical considerations is a case of preference. Therefore, the opposite party cannot claim that injustice is caused due to a bonafide delay.
• It cannot be presumed that the delay has been caused by the litigant deliberately as by delaying, a litigant gains nothing but put himself into a serious risk.

INSTANCES WHERE CONDONATION OF DELAY CAN BE FILED

The following grounds must be considered while granting the condonation of delay

• Subsequent amendments in the law.
• The party's illness, where the nature and severity of the disease and the facts surrounding the failure to act must be interpreted.
• The party is a minor with insufficient reasons.
• Poverty and paupers.
• A certain amount of flexibility is provided in case of a government servant since they are not given incentives to fulfil the task.
• The party is illiterate.
• Delay is caused due to the pendency of a writ petition.
• Grounds such as error in court proceedings, delay in fetching copies can also be considered.

TIME LIMIT FOR FILING CONDONATION OF DELAY

Schedule 1 of the limitation act sets a specific time limit for every suit to be instituted as per its nature

• A suit dealing with contracts, accounts, suits related to moveable property and retrieval of a lawsuit under a contract among others has 3-year limit.
• Suits specific to possession of the immovable property are given a 12-year statute of limitations. On the other hand, suits dealing with mortgaged property have a 30 year statute of limitations.
• With regard to tort suits, there is a time limit of 1 year (3 years for compensation in some cases). In a scenario of appeals under CPC and CrPC, the time limit is 30 to 90 days.

MEANING OF SUFFICIENT CAUSE

In order to seek condonation of delay, a party must show the 'sufficient cause' of delay, which means that one must satisfy the court that they were obstructed by some 'sufficient cause' from filing the application or appeal within the limitation period. However, the legislation does not provide any proper definition of the term 'sufficient cause', giving it a much wider scope of interpretation. However, the high court of Gujarat in the case of Municipal Corporation of Ahmedabad vs. Voltas Ltd. [1995 (1) GLH 549]stated that, "'sufficient cause' must be interpreted liberally in order to ensure that no injustice is done to the judgment debtor by depriving a definition to such wide doctrine would limit its scope".

Also, the court in the case of Balwant Singh vs. Jagdish Singh[(2010) 8 SCC 685]held that, "a party seeking condonation of delay must show that they were acting bonafide and had taken all possible measures within their power and control and did not approach the court with any unnecessary delay".

Further, the Supreme Court in the case of Collecter Land Acquisition vs. MstKatiji and Ors. held that, "the term sufficient cause in the provision is reasonably flexible, allowing courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner. This allows the courts to serve justice, which was why they were formed. However, the courts lower in the hierarchy seem to not be exercising this power much".

Section 5 of The Limitation Act, 1963 makes it ample clear that granting condonation of delay is totally upon the discretion of the court and the burden of proof for proving sufficient cause lies upon the party claiming for condonation. However, ignorance of law and carelessness can never be sufficient cause.

PROCEDURE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY

Rule 3A was inserted in the legislation after the amendment act of 1976, which lays down the procedure for condonation of delay. It states that if an appeal is presented after the expiry of the prescribed time frame, then an application stating the sufficient cause of delay must be filed before the court. The rule was recommended by the Privy Council. But, subjecting the admission of such appeals to the opinion of the court was however disapproved by the council and it stressed more on the need for adoption of a procedure which settles the final determination of the question as to limitation before admission of appeal. The Supreme Court in the case of State of MP vs. Pradeep Kumar, observed two aspects of this rule

• Informing the appellant filing a time-barred appear that his action will not be entertained until and unless he files an application seeking condonation of delay stating sufficient cause for delay in filing the application.
• Telling him to be patient as the condonation of delay is a condition precedent to hearing their appeal.

TYPE OF JURISDICTION

The court exercises a discretionary jurisdiction in condoning the delay and admitting the appeal and even if the application seeking condonation of delay shows sufficient cause, then the decision that whether the party is entitled to the condonation of delay or mot rests upon the discretion of the court.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE CONDONATION OF DELAY

Though Section 5 of the limitation act is an exception to the legislation itself. However, there are also certain exceptions restricting the scope of condonation of delay

• The doctrine is applicable only in the cases of criminal proceedings.
• The doctrine covers only appeals and applications and does not include institution of suits.
• The doctrine covers all kinds of appeals and applications, except for the application filed under any of the provisions of Order XXI of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

CONCLUSION

The law of limitation and condonation of delay are two effective tools for effective litigation and quick disposal of cases. The law of limitation ensures that the case is filed within the prescribed period so as to avoid unnecessary delays and is the epitome of the maxim, 'vigilantibus non dormentibus jura subvenitent'. On the other hand, condonation of delay is the safeguard to the law of limitation and bars certain cases in which the delay in filing the suit is justifiable, i.e. can be backed by having sufficient cause.

There are cases where the court didn't allow condoning the delay of one day and there are cases where the court excuses delay of several years, as it varies from case to case and the court has discretionary jurisdiction to determine whether a case is suitable for condonation or not."