SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(SC) 482

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.A. BOBDE, CJI., R. SUBHASH REDDY, A.S. BOPANNA, JJ.
IN RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION
Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 along with IAS. 48574, 49221, 51078, 51082, 50977, 50985, 55276, 55277, 58914, 58910, 60198 of 2020; I.A. No. 48672, 48375, 48461, 48673, 48374, 48416, 48408, 48671 of 2020;
Decided On : 10-07-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Dushyant Dave, Sr.Adv.(AC)(Not Joined) Mr. KK Venugopal, AG Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG Mr. Ankur Talwar, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv Mr. B.V. Balram Das, AOR Mr. Divyakant Lahoti, AoR Mr. Parikshit Ahuja, Adv. Ms. Praveena Bisht, Adv. Ms. Vindhya Mehra, Adv. Ms. Madhur Jhavar, Adv. Mr. Kartik Lahoti, Adv. Mr. Rahul Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Bhanu Pant, Adv. Mr Apoorv Kurup, Adv. Ms. Upama Bhattacharjee, Adv. Mr. C.M. Lall, Sr. Adv. Mr. Gurvinder Singh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Miglani, Adv. Mr. Rahul Vidhani, Adv. Ms. Nancy Roy, Adv. Ms.Archana Sahadeva, AOR Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sameer Pandit, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Ranjan, Adv. Mr. Utkarsh Kulvi, Adv. Mr. Govind Manoharan, Adv. Ms. Sarrah Khambati, Adv. Mr. Pranaya Goyal, AOR Mr. V. Giri, Sr.Aadv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. Ms. Aruna Mathur, AOR Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv. Ms. Geetanjali, Adv. For M/s. Arputham Aruana & Co. Mr. Pravin H. Parekh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sameer Parekh Adv Mr. Kshatrshal Raj Adv for M/S. Parekh & Co., AOR Mr. Yashvardhan, Adv, Mr. Apoorv Shukla, AOR, Ms.Ishita Farsaiya, Adv. Ms. Prabhleen Kaur, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Rati Tandon, Adv Ms. Anannya Ghosh, AOR Mr. Vivek Narayan Sharma, AOR Mr. Akash Shukla, Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. A. Lakshminarayanan, AOR Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Adv. Mr. Varun K Chopra, Adv. Mr. Akshat Gupta, Adv. Ms. Rajshree Sharma, Adv. Mr. Gurtejpal Singh, Adv. Mr. Ayush Luthra, Adv. Mr. Shivanshu Singh, Adv. Mohd. Shakei Naru, Adv. For M/s. VKC Law Offices, AOR Mr. Charanpal Singh Bagri, Adv. Mr. Anilendra Pandey, AOR Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, AOR Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR Mr. S. Thananjayan, AOR Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, AOR Mr. Sahil Mongia, Adv. Mr. Tushar Singh, Adv. Mr. Rahul Yadav, Adv. Ms. Pankhuri, Adv. Mr. Akhilesh Yadav, Adv.

Courts have the discretion to extend time limits under specific statutes during exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 lockdown, and alternative methods for service of legal documents may be allowed during the lockdown period.

Headnote:

COVID-19 - Extension of Time Limits under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - The court extended all periods of limitation prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 from 15.03.2020 till further orders, including the time limit for passing arbitral awards under Section 29A and the time limit for completing the statement of claim and defence under Section 23(4). The court also extended the time for completing the process of compulsory pre-litigation mediation and settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Additionally, the court allowed service of notices, summons, and pleadings/documents by e-mail, FAX, and instant messaging services during the lockdown period. However, the court declined to interfere with the period of validity of a cheque prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 35-A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.

Fact of the Case:

Parties sought extension of time limits under various statutes due to the COVID-19 lockdown.

Finding of the Court:

The court extended time limits under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and allowed alternative methods for service of notices, summons, and pleadings/documents. However, the court declined to interfere with the period of validity of a cheque prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India.

Issues: Extension of time limits under various statutes due to the COVID-19 lockdown.

Ratio Decidendi: The court has the discretion to extend time limits under specific statutes during exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 lockdown. Alternative methods for service of notices, summons, and pleadings/documents may be allowed during the lockdown period.

Final Decision: The court extended time limits under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, and allowed alternative methods for service of notices, summons, and pleadings/documents. However, the court declined to interfere with the period of validity of a cheque prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India.

Judgement Key Points

To serve notice during the period of lockdown or exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the court has authorized alternative methods of service. Specifically, notices, summons, and pleadings/documents may be effected by electronic means such as e-mail, FAX, and instant messaging services like WhatsApp, Telegram, or Signal.

Furthermore, if service is effected through instant messaging services, it is required that the same document also be served via e-mail on the same date to ensure proper communication and documentation of service (!) .


ORDER :

1. Parties have prayed to this Court for extending the time where limitation is to expire during the period when there is a lockdown in view of COVID-19 or the time to perform a particular act is to expire during the lockdown.

I.A. No. 49221/2020-Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Taken on Board.

2. In Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020, by our order dated 23.03.2020 and 06.05.2020, we ordered that all periods of limitation prescribed under the Arbiration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall be extended w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders.

3. Learned Attorney General has sought a minor modification in the aforesaid orders.

4. Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not prescribe a period of limitation but fixes a time to do certain acts, i.e. making an arbitral award within a prescribed time. We, accordingly, direct that the aforesaid orders shall also apply for extension of time limit for passing arbitral award under Section 29A of the said Act. Similarly, Section 23(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for a time period of 6 months for the completion of the statement of claim and defence. We, accordingly, direct that the aforesaid orders shall also apply for extension of the time limit prescribed under Section 23(4) of the said Act.

5. The application is disposed of accordingly.

Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015.

6. Under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, time is prescribed for completing the process of compulsory pre-litigation, mediation and settlement. The said time is also liable to be extended. We, accordingly, direct that the said time shall stand extended from the time when the lockdown is lifted plus 45 days thereafter. That is to say that if the above period, i.e. the period of lockdown plus 45 days has expired, no further period shall be liable to be excluded.

I.A. No. 48461/2020-Service of all notices, summons and exchange of pleadings

7. Service of notices, summons and exchange of pleadings/documents, is a requirement of virtually every legal proceeding. Service of notices, summons and pleadings etc. have not been possible during the period of lockdown because this involves visits to post offices, courier companies or physical delivery of notices, summons and pleadings. We, therefore, consider it appropriate to direct that such services of all the above may be effected by e-mail, FAX, commonly used instant messaging services, such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal etc. However, if a party intends to effect service by means of said instant messaging services, we direct that in addition thereto, the party must also effect service of the same document/documents by e-mail, simultaneously on the same date.

Extension of validity of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881-I.A. Nos. 48461 and 48672/2020 (IA. No. 48671/2020, 48673/2020)

I.A. No. 48671/2020 for impleadment is allowed.

8. With reference to the prayer, that the period of validity of a cheque be extended, we find that the said period has not been prescribed by any Statute but it is a period prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 35-A of the Banking Regulation Act,1949. We do not consider it appropriate to interfere with the period prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India, particularly, since the entire banking system functions on the basis of the period so prescribed.

9. The Reserve Bank of India may in its discretion, alter such period as it thinks fit. Ordered accordingly.

The instant applications are disposed of accordingly.

I.A. Nos. 48374/2020 and 48375/2020

14. List after six weeks.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top