{"id":58431,"date":"2016-07-27T14:25:20","date_gmt":"2016-07-27T08:55:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=58431"},"modified":"2016-09-13T14:48:36","modified_gmt":"2016-09-13T09:18:36","slug":"section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/","title":{"rendered":"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: Interpreting the provision under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Court said that despite liberal interpretation placed under the said provision, the matter in issue in the earlier proceeding and the latter proceeding has to be conferred requisite importance.\u00a0 The words \u201cin accordance with law\u201d under the said provision allow an argument to be canvassed that the time spent in earlier proceeding deserved exclusion while computing the period of limitation. However, Section 14 of the 1963 Act lays down that the proceedings must relate to the same matter in issue.<\/p>\n

In the matter where condonation of delay in filing an objection under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was in question, the respondent had earlier filed an application under Section 11 of the 1996 Act to appoint an arbitrator before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh after participating in the Arbitration proceeding as per the Arbitration Clause in the Contract where the Arbitrator had given the award in the favour of the appellant. The respondent had argued that the impugned Clause could not be treated as an arbitration clause and, therefore, the court should appoint an arbitrator.<\/p>\n

The bench of Dipak Misra and R.F. Natiman, JJ, considering the facts of the case, said that filing of an application under Section 11 of the 1996 Act for an appointment of arbitrator is totally different than an objection to award filed under Section 34 of the 1996 Act as one is at the stage of initiation, and the other at the stage of culmination. Hence, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the proceedings relate to \u201csame matter in issue\u201d. Stating that Section 14 of the 1963 Act emphasizes on due diligence and good faith, the Court said that the respondent instead of participating in the arbitration proceedings, could have immediately taken steps for appointment of arbitrator as he thought appropriate or he could have filed his objections under Section 34(2) of the 1996 Act within permissible parameters. It was held that though liberal interpretation should be placed on Section 14 of the 1963 Act, but if the fact situation exposits absence of good faith of great magnitude, law should not come to the rescue of such a litigant. [Commissioner, M.P. Housing Board v. Mohanlal and Company, 2016 SCC OnLine SC 738<\/a>, decided on 19.07.2016]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: Interpreting the provision under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Court said that despite liberal interpretation placed under <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-58431","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt"],"yoast_head":"\nSection 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide | 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\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: Interpreting the provision under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Court said that despite liberal interpretation placed under\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/\" \/>\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=\"2016-07-27T08:55:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-13T09:18:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\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\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/\",\"name\":\"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-07-27T08:55:20+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-13T09:18:36+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide\"}]},{\"@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\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide | 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\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide","og_description":"Supreme Court: Interpreting the provision under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the Court said that despite liberal interpretation placed under","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2016-07-27T08:55:20+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-13T09:18:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/","name":"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2016-07-27T08:55:20+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-13T09:18:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/27\/section-14-of-the-limitation-act-1963-does-not-come-to-the-rescue-of-litigant-acting-malafide\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not come to the rescue of litigant acting malafide"}]},{"@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\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":240225,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/05\/chh-hc-whether-in-a-criminal-proceeding-s-141-of-limitation-act-1963-would-be-applicable-court-not-to-apply-beneficent-provisions-in-a-pedantic-manner\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":0},"title":"Chh HC | Whether in a criminal proceeding, S. 14(1) of Limitation Act, 1963 would be applicable? Court not to apply beneficent provisions in a pedantic manner \u00a0","author":"Editor","date":"December 5, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that the respondent 1 \/ accused was discharged on 6-6-2011 against which the petitioner filed application for grant of leave to appeal with a delay of approximately 2 years,\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":[]},{"id":97771,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/01\/05\/section-5-of-the-limitation-act-1963-is-not-applicable-in-case-of-revision-petition-under-section-81-of-the-assam-value-added-tax-act-2003\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":1},"title":"Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is not applicable in case of revision petition under Section 81 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"January 5, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Deciding an important question of law as to whether provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 are applicable in respect of revision petition filed in the High Court under Section 81 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (VAT Act), the Court held that the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":247248,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/17\/interplay-of-ib-code-with-law-on-limitation-the-consistent-inconsistency-part-i\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":2},"title":"Interplay of IB Code with law on limitation \u2013 The consistent \u201cinconsistency\u201d \u2013 Part I","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 17, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Akaant Kumar Mittal\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Akaant Mittal"","block_context":{"text":"Akaant Mittal","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/individual\/akaant-mittal\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":315013,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/22\/limitation-appeal-against-acquittal-can-be-condoned-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":3},"title":"Limitation for appeal against acquittal can be condoned: Supreme Court","author":"Ridhi","date":"February 22, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court acknowledged that in case of special law prescribing a limitation period, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would have no application.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Limitation for appeal against acquittal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/30_1_2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/30_1_2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/30_1_2023.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/30_1_2023.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":332385,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/10\/04\/whether-the-law-of-limitation-is-applicable-to-the-claims-under-the-msmed-act-2006\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":4},"title":"Whether the Law of Limitation is Applicable to the Claims under the MSMED Act, 2006","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"by Aparna Ramesh Devkar","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Law of Limitation","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Law-of-Limitation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Law-of-Limitation.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Law-of-Limitation.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Law-of-Limitation.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":164964,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/10\/24\/30-days-limitation-period-section-30-rdb-act-cant-condoned-section-5-limitation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":58431,"position":5},"title":"30 days limitation period under Section 30 of RDB Act can\u2019t be condoned by Section 5 of Limitation Act","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 24, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Deciding the question as to whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked to condone the prescribed period of 30 days, under Section 30(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act) for preferring an appeal before the Tribunal, against an order\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58431","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\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=58431"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58431\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58431"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58431"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58431"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}