IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION versus .

Citation: [2021] 2 S.C.R. 640 · Decided: 08-03-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.A. BOBDE, L. NAGESWARA RAO, S. RAVINDRA BHAT · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
640
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 2 S.C.R.
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION
(Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 03 of 2020)
MARCH 08, 2021
[S. A. BOBDE, CJI, L. NAGESWARA RAO AND
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.]
Limitation – Extension of – COVID-19 pandemic – Sou motu
cognizance was taken of the situation arising from difficulties faced
by the litigants across the country during COVID-19 pandemic in
filing petitions/applications/suits/appeals/other proceedings within
the prescribed period of limitation under general law of limitation
or under special laws (both Central or State) – By an order dated
23.03.2020, the period of limitation was extended with effect from
15.03.2020 and order dated 23.03.2020 was extended from time to
time – Considering improvement in the situation and changing
scenario relating to pandemic, order dated 23.03.2020 has served
its purpose and extension of limitation should come to an end –
Regarding the future course of action, the following directions are
issued: 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 u/ss. 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996, s.12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015
and provisos (b) and (c) of s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation
for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or
tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings; 4)
The Government of India shall amend the guidelines for containment
[2021] 2 S.C.R. 640
640
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
641
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”
– Accordingly, the Suo motu writ petition is disposed of.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Suo Moto Writ Petition
(Civil) No. 03 of 2020
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)
By Courts Motion.
K. K. Venugopal, AG, Tushar Mehta, SG, Dushyant Dave, P.H.
Parekh, K.V. Vishwanathan, Sidharth Luthra, Soumya Chakraborty, Sr.
Advs, Kanu Agrawal, Ankur Talwar, B.V. Balram Das, Zoheb Hossain,
M. K. Maroria, Sameer Parekh, Kshatrashal Raj, Ms.Tanya Chaudhry,
Ms. Pratyusha Priyadarshini, Ms. Nitika Pandey, M/s Parekh & Co.,
Varun K. Chopra, Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Akshat Gupta, Gurtejpal
Singh, Rajshree Sharma, M/s Vkc Law Offices, Siddhesh Kotwal,
Divyansh Tiwari, Ms. Ana Upadhyay, Ms. Manya Hasija, Nirnimesh
Dube, Yashvardhan, Apoorv Shukla, Ms. Smita Kant, Ms. Ishita Farsaiya,
Ms.Prabhleen Kaur, Ms. Aruna Mathur, Ms. Anuradha Arputham,
Avneesh Arputham, M/s Arputham Aruna and Co., Sanjai Kumar Pathak,
Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Ms. Shashi Pathak, Divyakant Lahoti, Parikshit
Ahuja, Ms. Praveena Bisht, Ms. Vindhya Mehra, Ms. Madhur Jhavar,
Kartik Lahoti, Rahul Maheshwari, Jaigopal Saboo, Mukul Kumar,
Mahfooz A. Nazki, Polanki Gowtham, Shaik Mohammad Haneef,
T.Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Amitabh Sinha, Shrey Sharma, Ms. Anannya
Ghosh, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Vivek Narayan Sharma, Pranaya Goyal,
Nikhil Ranjan, Utkarsh Kulvi, Pranav Saigal, Ms. Radhika Gautam,
Sarvam Ritam Khare, Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, Ms. Meena Sehravat, Arvind
Kumar Sharma, A. Lakshminarayanan, Ranjan Mukherjee, Aproov
Kurup, Ms. Nidhi Mittal, B. Krishna Prasad, Anilendra Pandey, Ms.
Suchita Dixit, Sandeep, Madhusudan, Ms. Eliza Bar, Pai Amit, Abhimanyu
Tewari, Ms. Riddhi Sancheti, Ramesh Babu M.R., Arjun Garg, Ms.
Shrutika Garg, Avijit Mani Tripathi, T.K. Nayak, Ms. Garima Prashad,
Ms. Archana Sahadeva, Ms. Binu Tamta, Dhruv Tamta, Krishnanand
Pandeya, V.N. Raghupathy, S. Thananjayan, Mayank Kshirsagar, Advs.
for the appearing parties.
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR E
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.