Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS)
S.A.BOBDE, CJI., L. NAGESWARA RAO, SURYA KANT, JJ.
IN RE : COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION
SUO MOTU WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No(s).3 of 2020
Decided On : 23-03-2020
Extension of Limitation Period - Covid-19 - The court extended the period of limitation in all legal proceedings from 15th March 2020 until further orders to address the challenges faced by litigants due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The extension applies to both general law and special laws, and the court invoked its powers under Article 142 and Article 141 of the Constitution of India to issue a binding order on all Courts/Tribunals and authorities.
Fact of the Case:
The court took Suo Motu cognizance of the challenges faced by litigants due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the difficulties in filing petitions/applications/suits/appeals within the prescribed period of limitation.
Finding of the Court:
The court ordered the extension of the period of limitation in all legal proceedings from 15th March 2020 until further orders to address the challenges faced by litigants due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The court invoked its powers under Article 142 and Article 141 of the Constitution of India to issue a binding order on all Courts/Tribunals and authorities. Notice was issued to all Registrars General of the High Courts, returnable in four weeks.
Issues: The main issue was the challenge faced by litigants across the country in filing their petitions/applications/suits/appeals within the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or under Special Laws (both Central and/or State) due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Ratio Decidendi: The court exercised its power under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India to extend the period of limitation in all legal proceedings, making the order binding on all Courts/Tribunals and authorities.
Final Decision: The court ordered the extension of the period of limitation in all legal proceedings from 15th March 2020 until further orders and directed the notice to be issued to all Registrars General of the High Courts, returnable in four weeks.
ORDER
1. This Court has taken Suo Motu cognizance of the situation arising out of the challenge faced by the country on account of Covid-19 Virus and resultant difficulties that may be faced by litigants across the country in filing their petitions/applications/suits/ appeals/all other proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or under Special Laws (both Central and/or State).
2. To obviate such difficulties and to ensure that lawyers/litigants do not have to come physically to file such proceedings in respective Courts/Tribunals across the country including this Court, it is hereby ordered that a period of limitation in all such proceedings, irrespective of the limitation prescribed under the general law or Special Laws whether condonable or not shall stand extended w.e.f. 15th March 2020 till further order/s to be passed by this Court in present proceedings.
3. We are exercising this power under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India and declare that this order is a binding order within the meaning of Article 141 on all Courts/Tribunals and authorities.
4. This order may be brought to the notice of all High Courts for being communicated to all subordinate Courts/Tribunals within their respective jurisdiction.
5. Issue notice to all the Registrars General of the High Courts, returnable in four weeks.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
