Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Exclusion of the Date of Order or Cause of Action - When calculating limitation periods, the date on which the cause of action arises or the order is issued must be excluded from the computation. This is supported by case law such as SCC 257, which clarifies that the starting day of limitation should not be counted Bharat Aluminum Company Limited vs R.K. Transport Company - 2024 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 3374**>Bharat Aluminum Company Limited vs R.K. Transport Company - 2024 Supreme(Online)(CHH) 3374.
Specific Application in Different Contexts - For example, in accident claims, the date of the accident is excluded when computing limitation (e.g., Vimala Jose, W/o. Late Abraham VS Aboobacker - 2022 0 Supreme(Ker) 1062). Similarly, in cases involving detention orders, the date of detention is excluded from the three-month limitation period (SIMRANPAL SINGH SURI vs STATE & ANR.). In financial or contractual disputes, the date of receipt of legal notices or orders is excluded when counting the period for filing complaints or appeals (Satheeshan @ Shreeshan, S/o. Aravindhakshan VS State Of Kerala - 2022 0 Supreme(Ker) 696, SIMRANPAL SINGH SURI Vs STATE & ANR. - 2021 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 927).
Special Provisions During Exceptional Circumstances - The period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 was excluded from limitation calculations due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as directed by Supreme Court orders (SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA VS NIKHILKUMAR HASMUKHLAL SHAH - 2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLAT) 115). This exclusion applies to all judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings during this period.
Impact on Limitation Calculations - The exclusion of the date of the cause of action or relevant order ensures that the limitation period accurately reflects the time available for filing, preventing premature dismissals due to technicalities. For instance, in Vimala Jose, W/o. Late Abraham VS Aboobacker - 2022 0 Supreme(Ker) 1062, the limitation period for an application was computed by excluding the date of the accident, ensuring the application was within the three-month limit.
Analysis and Conclusion:The main insight across the sources is that when determining the limitation period, the date on which the cause of action, order, or relevant event occurs must be excluded from the calculation. This principle is reinforced by case law and statutory provisions, including the Limitation Act and judicial orders during extraordinary circumstances like the pandemic. Proper exclusion ensures fair opportunity for parties to act within the prescribed time, preventing the limitation clock from starting on the very day of the triggering event.
Filing appeals or legal actions within the prescribed limitation period is crucial to avoid dismissal on technical grounds. A common question arises: Limitation Starts from the Date of Order—but does the calculation truly begin on that exact day? Typically, no. Indian law mandates excluding certain dates, such as the service date of an order, periods under Supreme Court directives, or times affected by stays. This principle prevents unfair shortening of timelines and ensures fairness.
In this post, we explore these exclusions under statutes like the Limitation Act, 1963, General Clauses Act, and specific laws like the Central Excise Act. Drawing from judicial precedents, we'll clarify how to compute periods accurately. Note: This is general information; consult a legal professional for case-specific advice.
Under Section 35-O of the Central Excise Act, the date on which the order was served must be excluded when computing the appeal limitation period. For example, if an order was served on 26th June 2013, this date is excluded from the 60-day period. ROTOMAC GLOBAL PVT. LTD. VS COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE - Allahabad (2015)
This aligns with broader principles. Section 9 of the General Clauses Act states that the day from which a period is to be reckoned is to be excluded. Jai Durga Enterprises VS UOI - Delhi (2021)Jai Durga Enterprises vs Union of India - Delhi (2021)
Similarly, Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, provides that the day from which the limitation period is to be reckoned shall be excluded for suits, appeals, and applications. Dr. S. Magalingam VS A. Ganesan - Dishonour Of Cheque (2006)S. Rajanikanth VS C. Thirumagal learned VII Metropolitan Magistrate - Madras (2011)
In practice, if you receive an assessment order on 30th August 2019, exclude that date; the two-month limitation starts from 31st August. Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd. VS Commissioner (Appeals) - 2021 Supreme(Bom) 33
The Supreme Court's order dated 23rd March 2020 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.3/2020 directed excluding the period from 15th March 2020 for limitation calculations. This was clarified on 8th March 2021, extending to condonation of delays. Deepayan Mohanty vs Cargill India Pvt. Ltd. - Delhi (2022)Deepayan Mohanty VS Cargill India Pvt Ltd - Delhi (2022)
This applied across contexts. Under the Goa Value Added Tax Act, appeals against orders from 15th March 2020 to 28th February 2022 excluded this pandemic period. The court held: the period from 15/3/2020 to 28/2/2022 should be excluded from the limitation calculation. Novacare Drug Specialities Pvt. Ltd VS State of Goa - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 2092
In arbitration matters, the period from 15th March 2020 till 14th March 2021 was excluded per Supreme Court orders. National Seeds Corporation Ltd. VS Ram Avtar Gupta - 2023 Supreme(Del) 3656
Section 15 of the Limitation Act excludes time during which an injunction or stay order is effective, including the issuance and withdrawal days. MOHD. ILIYAS VS RAM DULARI - Allahabad (2016)Amarendra Kumar Paul VS Maya Paul - Supreme Court (2009)
For income tax assessments, periods pending under Section 132(3) proceedings are excluded from the one- or two-year limit under Section 158BE. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Central-3 VS Ppc Business And Products Pvt. Ltd. - 2017 Supreme(Del) 2275
Under Section 138 NI Act, the date of receipt of the dishonor memo is excluded. The court established that the date of receipt of the dishonor memo is excluded in calculating the notice period. Juli Bhansali W/o Shree Premchand Bhansali vs Sanjay Singhi S/o Shree T.C. Singhi - 2025 Supreme(Chh) 182 The limitation starts the next day, and holidays like Sundays are also excluded. Section 105 NI Act reinforces holiday exclusions.
In land disputes, the date of an ex parte order (24th June 1999) was excluded since notice service steps were taken but parties were absent. Necessarily, the date of the order has to be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation. S. Veera Raghavan VS Commissioner & Special Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 2019 Supreme(Mad) 1084
For service tax appeals, if the limitation expires on a Sunday (e.g., 1st December 2019), filing on Monday is valid under Section 10, General Clauses Act. If limitation for filing an appeal or extended period for filing an appeal expires on Sunday but it is filed on Monday, then by operation of section 10 it would be deemed to have been done within time. Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Pvt. Ltd. VS Commissioner (Appeals) - 2021 Supreme(Bom) 33
Section 14, Limitation Act allows excluding time spent in prior proceedings prosecuted in good faith. Petitioners challenging an arbitral award got 1239 days excluded from Section 34 proceedings. The Petitioners were entitled to the benefit of Section 14, excluding the entire period from the institution of original proceedings to the termination of Appellate proceedings. National Seeds Corporation Ltd. VS Ram Avtar Gupta - 2023 Supreme(Del) 3656
When calculating limitation:- Start by identifying the trigger date (e.g., service of order) and exclude it.- Check for extensions: Supreme Court COVID orders (15.03.2020–28.02.2022), stays, or holidays.- Document meticulously: Note excluded dates to defend against time-bar challenges.
Example Calculation:1. Order served: 26.06.2013 → Exclude 26.06.2013.2. 60-day appeal: Starts 27.06.2013, ends 25.08.2013 (adjust for holidays if applicable).3. Add COVID exclusion if relevant: Reckon from post-28.02.2022.
Pitfalls include ignoring service vs. order dates or overlooking pandemic extensions, leading to dismissals like in VAT appeals Novacare Drug Specialities Pvt. Ltd VS State of Goa - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 2092 or cheque dishonor cases Juli Bhansali W/o Shree Premchand Bhansali vs Sanjay Singhi S/o Shree T.C. Singhi - 2025 Supreme(Chh) 182.
Understanding these nuances can save cases from technical dismissal. Always maintain records and seek expert guidance, as courts interpret strictly but equitably.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and interpretations may vary by jurisdiction and facts.
#LimitationPeriod #LegalDeadlines #AppealFiling
period of six months has to be from the date of the accident and not by counting each day in a month. ... Be that as it may, since the Act does not expressly exclude Section 4 to 14 of the Limitation Act they apply to application under Section 16(3) of the Act. Therefore, the date from which the limitation commences has to be excluded in computing the period of limitation#HL_EN....
He would further submit that the appellant is entitled to get counting of limitation from 10.09.2022 which is next date of receiving of the forwarding memo to 09.09.2022 as per Section 105 of the N.I. Act which provides that holiday has to be excluded from counting of the period of 30 days. ... Thus, it is quite vivid that the appellant is entitled to get excluded 09.09.2022 for #HL_STAR....
It is submitted that in this case the triggering date is the invocation notice for the guarantee i.e. 26.05.2020 which fall within the period of 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022 and this has to be excluded for the purposes of counting the period of limitation for filing the application. ... 21 of 2022 filed in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 filed in Suo Motu Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020 In Re: Cognizance for Extension ....
(2024) 7 SCC 257 wherein it has been held that as per Section 12(1) of the LIMITATION ACT , the day from which the limitation period is to be reckoned must be excluded.
In the instant case, the Appellant has filed the appeal beyond the period of one year from the date of receipt of the Assessment Order and also not covered under extension of limitation period granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide Order dtd. 10/01/2022. ... The assessment order dtd. 4/6/2020 impugned in appeal before the respondent no.2, was passed during the period 15/3/2020 till 28/2/2022. ....
(Supra), one day has to be excluded for counting the one month limitation period and, therefore, excluding the day of 19.06.2019, the limitation period started from 20.06.2019 and the limitation period expired with the day in the succeeding month immediately preceding the day corresponding to the ... of detention, namely, February 5th has to be excluded; so done, the order#HL_E....
Sub-section (4) of Section 43, inter alia, provides that where the court orders that an arbitral award be set aside, the period between the commencement of the arbitration and the date of the order of the court shall be excluded in computing the time prescribed by the Limitation Act, 1963, for ... By an order dated 08.03.2021, period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 was excluded for compu....
That is to say, while counting the period of 15 days to make payment, the date on which the legal notice was received, has to be excluded. ... Then the accused was required to make the payment of the said amount within 15 days from the date of receipt of notice i.e. on or before 07.05.2020, since 22.04.2020, the date of receipt of notice has to be excluded, while calculating 15 day's tim....
(Supra), one day has to be excluded for counting the one month limitation period and, therefore, excluding the day of 19.06.2019, the limitation period started from 20.06.2019 and the limitation period expired with the day in the succeeding month immediately preceding the day corresponding to the ... of detention, namely, February 5th has to be excluded; so done, the order#HL_E....
(Supra), one day has to be excluded for counting the one month limitation period and, therefore, excluding the day of 19.06.2019, the limitation period started from 20.06.2019 and the limitation period expired with the day in the succeeding month immediately preceding the day corresponding to the ... of detention, namely, February 5th has to be excluded; so done, the order#HL_E....
It is submitted that the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court was further clarified in the order dated 8th March, 2021 to include within the ambit of the excluded period the outer limit within which a Tribunal or Court could condone delay. Therefore, the thirty days' period for filing the written statements would have expired on 1st March, 2020 and before the condonable period of further sixty days expired, the Supreme Court order dated 23rd March, 2020 passed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil)....
Therefore, the two months' limitation period was available to the petitioner upto 31.10.2019. Petitioner received the order-in-original sent by speed post on 30.08.2019. As per section 9 of the General Clauses Act, this date would have to be excluded while counting the limitation period of two months which would then commence from 31.08.2019. We have also seen that while construing the word 'month', it would mean a month as reckoned according to the British calendar, number o....
The Land Commissioner passed the order on 24 June, 1999. Even according to the Land Commissioner, the order was passed ex parte after taking steps to serve notice on the appellants. It is not as if the appellants were present before the Land Commissioner when the order in question was passed. Necessarily, the date of the order has to be excluded for the purpose of computing the period of limitation.
Otherwise, it may lead to absurd results as it may take several years before restraint under Section 132 (3) is lifted and it may, thus, extend the period of one or two years by all those years during which proceedings under Section 132 (3) remained pending. The period during which the proceedings under Section 132 (3) remained pending has to be excluded for the purpose of counting limitation of one or two years under Section 158BE. A contrary view is as much possible if one ....
Therefore, while counting 60 days, 26th June, 2013 has to be excluded while counting the period of limitation. 6. Admittedly, the order in original was served upon an employee of the appellant on 26th June, 2013 under Section 35-O of the Central Excise Act provides the proceeding for computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal and stipulates that the day on which the order was served has to be excluded.
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
