Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
The general principle across multiple sources is that once the limitation period starts, it continues to run and cannot be halted unless explicitly provided for by law or specific circumstances. For example, once time has begun to run no subsequent disability or inability to sue stops it ["Sona Khandi VS Ragina Parshad Koul - Jammu and Kashmir"], and the limitation will never stop running even if a party requests more time or delays occur ["N. G. Somashekar VS S. V. Shivaprasad - Dishonour Of Cheque"]. Similarly, the law of limitation cannot stop running once the clock starts ticking ["N. G. SOMASHEKAR VS S. V. SHIVAPRASAD - Karnataka"].
Exceptions and Specific Circumstances for Suspension or Extension
The appointment of a receiver or disability of a party does not generally stop the running of limitation unless explicitly provided for. The appointment of a receiver would not stop time from running ["Sona Khandi VS Ragina Parshad Koul - Jammu and Kashmir"], and subsequent disability or inability to sue does not stop the same ["SHRIMATI ANGOORI DEVI vs SHRI M.B. TIWARI & ORS. - Delhi"].
Computation of Limitation Period
Filing of appeals or proceedings does not necessarily stop limitation unless explicitly stated; in many cases, limitation continues to run from the date of the cause of action or decree ["Rakesh Kumar VS Chhotey Lal - Allahabad"].
Limitation and Legal Orders
Orders extending limitation periods clarify that only the period of limitation is extended, not the overall period for condoning delays or other procedural considerations. The extension of period of limitation does not mean the period upto which delay can be condoned ["Swaminathan, S/O. Kunjumani VS State Of Kerala, Represented By The Principal Secretary, (Forest & 1. Wild Life) - Kerala"], and the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding... shall stand excluded ["Swaminathan, S/O. Kunjumani VS State Of Kerala, Represented By The Principal Secretary, (Forest & Wild Life) - Kerala"].
Summary
In the realm of Indian civil law, time is of the essence when it comes to filing suits or applications. A common query arises: period of limitation does not stop running. This principle underscores a fundamental rule that governs legal proceedings, ensuring that claims are pursued promptly. But does the limitation period truly never halt? This blog post delves into the core legal findings, statutory provisions, judicial interpretations, and exceptions, drawing from authoritative sources to provide clarity.
Understanding this concept is crucial for litigants, businesses, and legal professionals to avoid time-barred claims. We'll explore the general rule, key exceptions, and practical implications, always remembering that this is general information and not specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
The law clearly establishes that once the period of limitation begins to run, it generally continues uninterrupted unless specific statutory provisions or judicial interventions intervene. This is the bedrock principle: the period of limitation does not stop running once initiated. Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church Trust Association VS Bala - 2025 1 Supreme 297B AND T AG VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - 2023 4 Supreme 65
Section 9 of the Limitation Act, 1963 explicitly reinforces this: Where once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to institute a suit or make an application stops it. B AND T AG VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - 2023 4 Supreme 65 This means personal hardships, like illness or other disabilities arising after the cause of action accrues, do not pause the clock.
Judicial rulings echo this continuity. Courts have described the limitation period as like a stop clock which once put into motion does not get stopped by any subsequent interjection. SHRIMATI ANGOORI DEVI vs SHRI M.B. TIWARI & ORS. In another instance, it was held that a party by his own act of not furnishing stamp paper cannot stop the running of period of limitation. SHYAM SUNDER SINGH and ANR. vs UDAY DEVI and ORS. These emphasize that self-induced delays or minor procedural hurdles do not toll the period.
Indian courts have consistently upheld the uninterrupted nature of limitation. In Gokak Patel Volkart Ltd., the court clarified that for non-continuing offences, limitation runs from the accrual of the cause of action. Gokak Patel Volkart LTD. VS Dundayya Gurushiddaiah Hiremath: Grace L. Eliza: Mohadinsabappasabdesai: Balu Jeevappa Upparatti: Bandu Appa Aundhkar - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 85 Similarly, the Supreme Court in Sankar Dastidar stated: There is no dispute that unless the wrong is a continuing one, the period of limitation does not stop running. Once the period begins to run, it does not stop except where the provision of Section 22 of the aforesaid Act would apply. Lilawati Devi wife of Late Rajnishwar Prasad Singh VS State of Bihar - 2019 Supreme(Jhk) 774Lilawati Devi VS State of Bihar
This view is mirrored in Shankar Dastidar vs. Banjula Dastidar (2006) 13 SCC 470, where claims for damages were not treated as continuing wrongs, barring suits filed beyond the prescribed time. Lilawati Devi VS State of BiharLilawati Devi wife of Late Rajnishwar Prasad Singh VS State of Bihar - 2019 Supreme(Jhk) 774 Furthermore, in challenges to instruments like settlement deeds, the period of limitation to challenge the instrument once start running does not stop. RENU KHHULLAR VS AARON @ ARUN BHANDARI - 2018 Supreme(Del) 1347
These precedents illustrate that courts prioritize the strict application of limitation to promote legal certainty and prevent stale claims.
While the default is continuity, exceptions exist where limitation may be tolled, suspended, or extended. These are narrowly construed and require specific conditions:
For continuing offences, limitation may restart or run from cessation of the wrong. However, this is not the norm. In a consumer dispute over a flat sale, where possession was given but the deed not executed, the court noted: Since the sale deed was not executed... the cause of action for seeking execution of the sale deed was continuing one... The period of limitation once started, does not stop. Sujit Kumar Sil VS Sudipta Biswas Unless explicitly a continuing wrong, limitation persists. Gokak Patel Volkart LTD. VS Dundayya Gurushiddaiah Hiremath: Grace L. Eliza: Mohadinsabappasabdesai: Balu Jeevappa Upparatti: Bandu Appa Aundhkar - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 85K. Parameswaran Pillai (dead) VS K. Sumathi alias Jesis Jessie Jacquiline - 1993 0 Supreme(SC) 746
Court orders can suspend limitation:- Stays under Section 10 CPC or specific injunctions may halt proceedings. B AND T AG VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - 2023 4 Supreme 65- In specific performance suits, injunction orders created hindrances, preventing the limitation bar: The suit for specific performance was not barred by limitation due to hindrances caused by injunction orders. Birinder Pal Singh (since Deceased) VS Gandharav Singh Nagra (retd. ) - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 4284- Time for obtaining decree copies is excluded under Section 12 of the Limitation Act. India House VS Kishan N. Lalwani - 2003 1 Supreme 12
In money suits, claims for damages are not continuing wrongs under Article 22 or 86, leading to dismissal if time-barred. Lilawati Devi VS State of Bihar Oral evidence contradicting pleadings further underscores no equitable extension. Lilawati Devi wife of Late Rajnishwar Prasad Singh VS State of Bihar - 2019 Supreme(Jhk) 774
This principle affects diverse cases—from property disputes to contractual claims. For instance:- Sale Agreements: Delay in deed execution may invoke continuing cause, but only if possession ties create ongoing obligation. Sujit Kumar Sil VS Sudipta Biswas- Injunction Impacts: Grants of injunction do not automatically extend limitation unless they directly impede filing. Birinder Pal Singh (since Deceased) VS Gandharav Singh Nagra (retd. ) - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 4284- Stamp Paper Delays: Parties cannot manufacture extensions. SHYAM SUNDER SINGH and ANR. vs UDAY DEVI and ORS.
Litigants must act diligently upon accrual of the right to sue. Courts inquire: Did a subsequent event truly stop the clock, or was it a self-serving delay?
The overarching principle is clear: the period of limitation does not stop running once commenced, barring explicit statutory or judicial exceptions. Supported by Section 9 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and rulings like Sankar Dastidar, this ensures justice is timely. B AND T AG VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - 2023 4 Supreme 65Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church Trust Association VS Bala - 2025 1 Supreme 297
Key Takeaways:- Monitor limitation from cause of action accrual—it's a relentless clock.- Identify if your case involves continuing wrongs or court stays for potential extensions.- File promptly; delays are rarely excused.- Always verify with primary documents and seek professional advice.
This analysis draws from established precedents, but laws evolve—stay informed. For personalized guidance, consult a legal expert.
References:1. Indian Evangelical Lutheran Church Trust Association VS Bala - 2025 1 Supreme 297: General rule of continuous limitation.2. B AND T AG VS MINISTRY OF DEFENCE - 2023 4 Supreme 65: Section 9 explanation.3. Gokak Patel Volkart LTD. VS Dundayya Gurushiddaiah Hiremath: Grace L. Eliza: Mohadinsabappasabdesai: Balu Jeevappa Upparatti: Bandu Appa Aundhkar - 1991 0 Supreme(SC) 85, K. Parameswaran Pillai (dead) VS K. Sumathi alias Jesis Jessie Jacquiline - 1993 0 Supreme(SC) 746: Continuing offences.4. Additional cases: SHRIMATI ANGOORI DEVI vs SHRI M.B. TIWARI & ORS., Sujit Kumar Sil VS Sudipta Biswas, Birinder Pal Singh (since Deceased) VS Gandharav Singh Nagra (retd. ) - 2018 Supreme(P&H) 4284, etc.
#LimitationAct, #IndianLaw, #LegalInsights
AA 2005 for the disputes to be referred to arbitration, does the computation of limitation period stop at the time when the action is filed in court? ... Moreover, if filing of the KLSC suit 350 does not stop limitation, the stay order granted on 31 October 2019 which was after limitation set in on 26 September 2019, would be rendered nugatory or redundant. ... Mothurmohun Goswami [1894] ILR 21 Cal 8 at p 18: The intention of the law of limitation i....
The learned District Judge, in the impugned judgment, has taken a view that the limitation starts running from the date of the knowledge. ... The learned District Judge, therefore, was absolutely incorrect in his adopting the view that because the period of limitation begins to run from the date of the knowledge and not from the date of the decree, the delay of 4 days in filing the appeal deserved to be condoned. ... Article 116 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act reads thus: ... D....
(vi) The period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 having been excluded from the purview of limitation, there will be no running of time during the said period. ... In those final orders, this Court not only provided for the extension of period of limitation but also made it clear that in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021 shall s....
The appointment of a receiver would not stop time from running in a case like the present, when a receiver is appointed, he on behalf of the family should institute suits and the mere appointment, of a Receiver cannot stop Limitation from running and the period of the possession of the receiver cannot ... be deducted when counting the period of Limitation. ... When therefore, once time has begin to run subsequent minority of the per....
The proper way to apply this provision is to compute the period of limitation with the time running till the date on which the injunction is issued, for that marks the date on which the running of time will stop. ... The time will stop running and will remain suspended till the day on which the order of injunction is withdrawn. It is on the day after that, when the time will again begin to run its course. ... Before the executing Court the decree-holder in the present....
Section 15 provides that the period of limitation shall not commence to run " until the removal of such disability or the death of such person, whichever first shall happen." ... By reason, therefore, of the provisions of section 15 the running of the period of limitation was suspended. Neither of the partners returned to Ceylon since, and while they were still away Babu Lall died in India on April 11, 1925, and Mathan Lall on May 8, 1925. ... Prescription-Goods sold-Absence be....
To the understanding of this Court, it is one thing to say that mere filing of an appeal would not arrest limitation from running, and quite different to say that a decree having been passed in appeal, the period of limitation would be reckoned from the date of the decree of the Appellate Court; not ... be subject to any period of limitation. ... Time, according to the learned Senior Advocate, would therefore, commence on 02.06.1975, ru....
A party by his own act of not furnishing stamp paper cannot stop the running of period of limitation. ... cases, the limitation will never stop running and/ or depend on the engrossment of the decree in stamp paper and that the period of limitation from the date of decree till the signing of the decree is not available to the not stop runni....
running then no subsequent inability or disability will stop the same thereby meaning that the period of limitation is like a stop clock which once put into motion does not get stopped by any subsequent interjection. ... The law regarding limitation is very clear and is enshrined in Section 9 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which clearly lays down that once the ‘cause of action’ accrues the period of limitation#HL_....
Article 58 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, which admittedly is the relevant Article applicable to this case, prescribes a period of three years for obtaining a declaration. The period of three years starts running from the time "when the right to sue first accrues". ... cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period." ... But the learned trial court ought to have known that Section 5 Limitation Act is not appl....
Since the sale deed was not executed by the petitioners despite giving the possession of the subject flat in the year 2002 for almost 11 years, the cause of action for seeking execution of the sale deed was continuing one. Here in this case as per the agreement between the parties the petitioners were required to handover the possession of the flat and execute the sale deed. The period of limitation once started, does not stop.
Once the period begins to run, it does not stop except where the provision of Section 22 of the aforesaid Act would apply. He submits that this view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in (2006) 13 SCC 470 (Shankar Dastidar vs. Banjula Dastidar and Another) and he refers to Para 8 of the aforesaid judgment and submits that the plaintiff never claimed any relief of permanent injunction or any other relief except claim for damages for an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- which he claimed to have suffered from the period 1992 to 1999. Counsel for the respondents further ....
There is no dispute that unless the wrong is a continuing one, the period of limitation does not stop running. Once the period begins to run, it does not stop except where the provision of Section 22 of the aforesaid Act would apply. Counsel for the respondents further submits that a suit for damages stand on a different footing vis-à-vis a continuing wrong in respect of enjoyment of ones right in a property. He submits that this view has been taken by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in (2006) 13 SCC 470 (Shankar Dastidar vs. Banjula Dastidar and Another)....
Whether the period of limitation which has once started running would stop due to a subsequent event/disability? Whether the grant of injunction order by a Civil Court would extend the period of limitation prescribed by law?
In the light of this settled proposition of law, the claim of the appellant that the period of limitation is to be reckoned from the date of cause of action i.e. when there arose “a need to challenge” the instrument, has no force in it. The period of limitation to challenge the instrument once start running does not stop. The plaint is bereft of any facts, showing as to why it should be reckoned from the date of alleged cause of action and not from the date of execution of the instrument.
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
