Limitation – Rules of limitation are meant to see that the parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly – They are based on principles of sound public policy and principles of equity:
Held: Time and again, the Supreme Court has reminded the District judiciary as well the High Courts that the concepts such as “liberal approach”, “Justice oriented approach”, “substantial justice” should not be employed to frustrate or jettison the substantial law of limitation – The High Court exhibited complete absence of judicial conscience and restraints, which a judge is expected to maintain while adjudicating a lis between the parties – The rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties – They are meant to see that the parties do not resort to dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly – The length of the delay is definitely a relevant matter which the court must take into consideration while considering whether the delay should be condoned or not – From the tenor of the approach of the respondents herein, it appears that they want to fix their own period of limitation for the purpose of instituting the proceedings for which law has prescribed a period of limitation – Once it is held that a party has lost his right to have the matter considered on merits because of his own inaction for a long, it cannot be presumed to be non-deliberate delay and in such circumstances of the case, he cannot be heard to plead that the substantial justice deserves to be preferred as against the technical considerations – While considering the plea for condonation of delay, the court must not start with the merits of the main matter – The court owes a duty to first ascertain the bona fides of the explanation offered by the party seeking condonation – It is only if the sufficient cause assigned by the litigant and the opposition of the other side is equally balanced that the court may bring into aid the merits of the matter for the purpose of condoning the delay – The question of limitation is not merely a technical consideration – The rules of limitation are based on the principles of sound public policy and principles of equity – No court should keep the ‘Sword of Damocles’ hanging over the head of a litigant for an indefinite period of time – The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and that of the Trial Court dated 05.08.2014 passed in Misc. No. 223 of 2006 is hereby restored. [Paras 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Bibhuti Bhushan Bose. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.