Judiciary Mcqs Of The Day: Limitation Act

Q1. Under limitation act exclusion of time of proceeding bona fide in court without jurisdiction is stipulated in:

a)    Section 14

b)    Section 16

c)    Section 15

d)    Section 13

Answer- a) Section 14

Explanation:

Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 states that the time spent in prosecuting a case with due diligence in a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other causes of a like nature, is unable to entertain it, should be excluded when computing the period of limitation.

This provision aims to ensure that a plaintiff who has been diligent and pursued his case in a court that he reasonably believed to have jurisdiction is not penalized for his mistake regarding the court's jurisdiction.

Q2. What is the limitation period provided for the leave to appear and defend a suit under summary procedure?

a)    10 days

b)    15 days

c)    30 days

d)    45 days

Answer - a) 10 days

Explanation:

The Order XXXVII Rule 3(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the defendant must apply for leave to defend within 10 days from the date of service of the summons by affidavit or otherwise disclose such facts as may be deemed sufficient to entitle him to defend, and shall enter an appearance. 

The court may grant leave to defend unconditionally if the defendant discloses facts that may be considered sufficient to entitle him to defend.

Q3. In the case of breach of contract or a continuing tort, when does a fresh period of limitation begin to run?

a)    Only when the breach or tort is initially discovered

b)    At the time when the breach your tort first occurs 

c)    At every moment during which the breach or tort continues

d)    Only when legal action is first considered

Answer- c) At every moment during which the breach or tort continues

Explanation:

Under the Limitation Act, 1963, the principle for continuing breaches and torts is that as long as the breach or wrongful act continues, a new cause of action arises at every moment during which the breach or tort continues. This means that the limitation period is effectively extended, allowing the aggrieved party to take legal action for as long as the breach or tort persists.

Section 22 of the Limitation Act, 1963:

This section specifically addresses continuing breaches and torts, stating that in cases of continuing breaches of contract and torts which are continuing in nature, a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment during which the breach or tort continues.

Q4. Section 3 of the limitation act 1963 does not apply to

a)    Suit 

b)    Appeal 

c)    Application for leave to sue as a pauper 

d)    Execution proceedings

Answer- d) Execution proceedings

Explanation:

This section essentially means that if a suit, appeal, or application is filed beyond the period of limitation prescribed by the Act, it must be dismissed by the court, even if the defendant has not raised the issue of limitation.

Execution proceedings are not mentioned in Section 3. Execution of a decree is governed by Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and specific provisions in the Limitation Act concerning the execution of decrees, Article 136, which provides a 12-year period for execution of a decree.

Q5- Limitation period prescribed in filling a suit by mortgager to recover possession of immovable property mortgaged.

a)    20 years

b)    12 years

c)    10 years

d)    30 years

 Answer – d) 30 years

Explanation:

Under the Limitation Act, 1963, the period of limitation for filing a suit by a mortgagor to recover possession of immovable property mortgaged is prescribed in Section 61(a) of the Schedule to the Act.

Section 61(a) of the Limitation Act, 1963, specifically provides the limitation period for a suit by a mortgagor to recover possession of immovable property mortgaged.

The prescribed period of limitation is 30 years.

The time from which the period begins to run is when the right to redeem or to recover possession accrues.

Thus, the limitation period prescribed for filing a suit by a mortgagor to recover possession of immovable property mortgaged is 30 years.

Q6. Which suits are exempted from the provisions of section 16(2) of the Limitation Act?

a)    Suits related to debt recovery

b)    Suits for possession of immovable property or hereditary office

c)    Suits for breach of contract

d)    None of the above

Answer- b) Suits for possession of immovable property or hereditary office

Explanation:

Section 16(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, addresses the limitation period for suits when the person entitled to sue or the person against whom the right to sue has accrued dies before the limitation period expires. Specifically, Section 16(1) provides that if the person entitled to institute a suit or make an application dies before the limitation period has expired, the limitation period will be extended by the time allowed under the law for legal representatives to sue or make the application.

Thus, Section 16(2) does not exempt suits for possession of immovable property or hereditary office from its provisions.

Q7. What is the meaning of “good faith” as per the limitation act?

a)    Any action taken without care attention 

b)    Actions performed with due care and attention 

c)    Acts performed with malicious intent 

d)    Acts performed without any consideration

Answer – b) Actions performed with due care and attention

Explanation: 

Under Limitation Act, 1963 good faith refers to those actions which are performed with utmost care and attention. This implies that the actions are done honestly without a malicious intent or negligence.

Good faith being a fundamental principle ensures that the parties act honestly and fairly in their dealings, also helps in establishing equity and fairness in legal proceedings. While emphasizing the importance of honest and careful conduct, ensuring that legal actions are undertaken responsibly and within the bounds of the law.

Q8. Under what circumstances does section 23 of the limitation act dictate the computation of the period of limitation for a suit for compensation?

a)    When the act giving rise to the suit is morally wrong 

b)    When the act results in public nuisance 

c)    When the act does not give rise to cause of action unless specify injury actually results 

d)    When the act is intentional

Answer- c) When the act does not give rise to cause of action unless specify injury actually results

Explanation:

According to Section 23, in cases where the cause of action arises from an act which does not itself give rise to a cause of action unless and until some specific injury actually results, the period of limitation starts running from the time when the injury results.

This section applies to situations where the wrongful act or omission itself might not immediately give rise to a cause of action unless and until it causes actual harm or injury to the plaintiff. In such cases, the limitation period begins to run from the time when the injury or harm becomes apparent or occurs, rather than from the time of the original wrongful act.

Q9. A judgement was passed on 10/07/2002, and decree was prepared on 25/07/2002. An application for certified copy was made on 11/07/2002 and the certified copy was ready on 1/08/2002 and the delivery of certified copy was taken on 05/08/2002. Under section 12, the period of limitation to be excluded is-

a)    11/07/2002 to 01/08/2002

b)    11/07/2002 to 05/08/2002

c)    10/07/2002 to 01/08/2002

d)    10/07/2002 to 05/08/2002

Answer- a) 11/07/2002 to 01/08/2002

Explanation:

Under Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, certain periods are excluded when computing the limitation period for filing appeals, applications, and suits. Specifically, Section 12(2) states that in computing the period of limitation for an appeal, the day on which the judgment was pronounced and the time required for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence, or order appealed from, are excluded.

According to Section 12(2), the time required for obtaining a copy of the decree should be excluded. This period is from the date of application for the certified copy to the date when the copy is ready for delivery, not the date when the copy is actually taken.

Therefore, the period of limitation to be excluded is from 11/07/2002 to 01/08/2002.

Q10.  Under Limitation Act, who is considered as an agent duly authorized on the behalf in the context of sections 18 and 19 when it comes to a person under disability?

a)    Any individual willing to act on behalf of person under disability

b)    Only the legal counsel appointed by the person under disability

c)    Lawful guardian, committee, manager or an agent authorized by them for signing acknowledgment or making payment.

d)    Only immediate family members of the person under disability

Answer – c) Lawful guardian, committee, manager or an agent authorized by them for signing acknowledgment or making payment.

Explanation:

Sections 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act allows for the extension of the limitation period if there is an acknowledgment of liability or a part payment by an authorized person.

For individuals under disability (such as minors or persons of unsound mind), only their lawful guardian, committee, manager, or an agent authorized by these individuals can make such acknowledgments or payments. This ensures that the rights and interests of the person under disability are properly represented and protected and that only those with legal authority can act on their behalf.