{"id":204046,"date":"2018-10-22T13:15:31","date_gmt":"2018-10-22T07:45:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=204046"},"modified":"2018-10-23T17:40:43","modified_gmt":"2018-10-23T12:10:43","slug":"open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: <\/strong>A Single Judge Bench comprising of Valmiki Mehta, J., dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil procedure, 1908 against the judgment of the trial court whereby appellant\u2019s recovery suit was dismissed as barred by limitation.<\/p>\n

The appellant issued advertisements in the newspaper for the weekly draws of lotteries for the State of Meghalaya. As per the statement of account maintained by the appellant\/plaintiff, a sum of Rs 4, 28,256.56\/- was due. Despite writing repeated letters to the respondent (alleged to be agent of the State), the payment due was not released. Hence, the subject recovery suit was filed. The respondent, inter alia, <\/em>pleaded the suit to be barred by limitation. The trial court, vide the judgment impugned, dismissed the suit on the ground as mentioned. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant preferred the instant appeal.<\/p>\n

The High Court perused the record and noted that all the bills on which the claim of the appellant was based were from 31 October 1984 to 30 April 1985. The subject suit was filed on 28 May 1988 and therefore if the bills were raised prior 28 May 1985, the claim of those bills would be barred by limitation. It was argued by the appellant that the suit was within limitation as a cash payment of Rs 50,000 was made by the respondent on 29 May 1985. The argument was rejected as the cash entry was without any date and that too only in the account maintained by the appellant and not in account maintained by the respondent. It was held that a cash payment simpliciter will not qualify for extension of limitation under Sections 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act, as it is not proved. Further, it was observed that the only other way in which the suit would have been within limitation was if it was based on an open, mutual and current account.<\/em> Making reference to Supreme Court decisions in \u00a0Hindustan Forest Company v. Lal Chand, <\/em>AIR 1959 SC 1349<\/a> and Kesharichand Jaisukhal v. Shillong Banking Corporation<\/em>, AIR 1965 SC 1711<\/a>, the High Court observed that under Article 1 of the Limitation Act, such an account exists only if there are shifting balances which was not the case herein. In view of the aforesaid, the judgment impugned was found to be free of error. The appeal was thus dismissed. [Continental Advertising (P) Ltd. v. Karan & Co.,2018 SCC OnLine Del 11921<\/b><\/a>, dated 15-10-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Valmiki Mehta, J., dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[32164,24144,31762],"class_list":["post-204046","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cash-payment","tag-limitation-act","tag-recovery-suit"],"yoast_head":"\n\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Valmiki Mehta, J., dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-10-22T07:45:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-23T12:10:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/\",\"name\":\"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-10-22T07:45:31+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-23T12:10:43+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC","og_description":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Valmiki Mehta, J., dismissed a regular first appeal filed under Section 96 of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-10-22T07:45:31+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-23T12:10:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/","name":"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-10-22T07:45:31+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-23T12:10:43+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/22\/open-mutual-and-current-account-exists-only-when-there-are-shifting-balances-cash-payment-simpliciter-held-not-to-extend-limitation-under-section-18-19-limitation-act-delhi-hc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u201cOpen, mutual and current account\u201d exists only when there are shifting balances; cash payment simpliciter held not to extend limitation under Section 18, 19 limitation Act: Delhi HC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":309822,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/21\/dhc-dismisses-application-for-availing-benefit-u-s-14-limitation-act-on-lack-of-due-diligence-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":0},"title":"\u2018Complete lack of due diligence in prosecution as petition u\/s 34 of A&C Act, 1996 dismissed twice\u2019; Delhi HC dismisses application filed for availing benefit u\/s 14 of Limitation Act","author":"Simranjeet","date":"December 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIn the context of Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963, what needs to be seen is whether appellant has brought on the record any evidence to show that he is prosecuting the previously instituted suit with due diligence.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":356865,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/18\/nclat-3-year-limitation-period-for-section-95-ibc-application\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":1},"title":"Limitation period of S.95 IBC applications against personal guarantor based on DRT recovery certificate is three years: NCLAT","author":"Editor","date":"August 18, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The appellant relying on Tottempudi Salalith v. State Bank of India, (2024) 1 SCC 24, contended that the limitation for filing Section 95 IBC application in the present case must be treated as 12 years and hence the application filed was not barred by time.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Limitation period for Section 95 IBC application","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Limitation-period-for-Section-95-IBC-application.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Limitation-period-for-Section-95-IBC-application.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Limitation-period-for-Section-95-IBC-application.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Limitation-period-for-Section-95-IBC-application.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306753,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/07\/nclat-rejects-application-under-section-9-of-the-ibc-as-being-time-barred-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Withdrawal of suit cannot be considered as failure of prior proceeding\u2019; NCLAT rejects Section 9 application as being time-barred","author":"Ritu","date":"November 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A mere availability of arbitration or any other proceeding could not preclude the operational creditor from initiating proceedings under Section 9 of the IBC. The critical question would be whether the application was filed within the limitation period.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":353450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/15\/delhi-high-court-valid-tds-payment-triggers-fresh-period-of-limitation-section-19-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":3},"title":"\u201cValid TDS payment triggers a fresh period of limitation under Section 19\u201d; Delhi High Court allows partial financial claim by an Ad Company","author":"Arunima","date":"July 15, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The dispute arose from unpaid advertising invoices raised by Planet Advertising Pvt. Ltd. between July and November 2014 for campaigns executed for Ambience Pvt. Ltd. The plaintiff claimed Rs. 1.03 crore, asserting that part-payment, backdated purchase orders, and TDS deductions extended the limitation period.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Valid TDS payment triggers fresh period of limitation","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Valid-TDS-payment-triggers-fresh-period-of-limitation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Valid-TDS-payment-triggers-fresh-period-of-limitation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Valid-TDS-payment-triggers-fresh-period-of-limitation.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Valid-TDS-payment-triggers-fresh-period-of-limitation.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":322995,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/27\/supreme-court-refers-issue-whether-time-barred-debts-recoverable-special-statutes-3-judge-bench\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":4},"title":"Inside Supreme Court judgment referring the issue of recovering time barred debts under Special Statutes to 3-judge Bench","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court reiterated that the laws of limitation only bar the remedy and do not extinguish the right, except in cases where title is acquired by prescription.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"time barred debts","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/time-barred-debts.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/time-barred-debts.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/time-barred-debts.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/time-barred-debts.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197646,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/28\/period-of-delay-is-not-the-criteria-while-considering-application-under-section-5-of-limitation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":204046,"position":5},"title":"Period of delay is not the criteria while considering application under Section 5 of Limitation Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 28, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S. Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ., refused to condone a delay of 65 days in filing the appeal under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which was consequently dismissed. The appellant filed the said appeal against the order of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204046","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=204046"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204046\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204046"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204046"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204046"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}