Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
The sources indicate that while Kerala implemented specific measures (e.g., rent exemptions, lease extensions) during COVID-19, there was no distinct or separate limitation period exemption exclusively for Kerala; rather, general national extensions and exemptions were applied, often recognizing the pandemic's impact on administrative and legal processes ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1425"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1593"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1425"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1593"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 873"]- ["2022 0 Supreme(Bom) 1607"]- ["M/S HINDUSTAN STEELWORKS CONSTRUCTION LIMITED vs THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY - Chhattisgarh"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 592"]- ["2024 0 Supreme(AP) 913"]
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted normal life across India, including access to courts and legal deadlines. Many wondered: was there a exemption specifically for Kerala during the COVID days? The answer is yes—courts, including those in Kerala, provided relief by excluding key pandemic periods from limitation calculations. This effectively paused the 'limitation clock' for filing cases, appeals, and proceedings.
This blog post breaks down the judicial orders, Kerala-specific measures, distinctions between extension and exclusion, exceptions, and practical tips. While this offers general insights based on court rulings, it is not legal advice—consult a lawyer for your case.
Limitation periods under laws like the , set strict deadlines for filing suits or appeals. The nationwide lockdowns from March 2020 halted court operations, travel, and consultations, risking countless cases being time-barred.
The took cognizance, recognizing these 'exceptional circumstances.' It issued orders excluding specific periods from , a move followed by High Courts including 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 776.
Key excluded period: to 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 776. This meant litigants could file after this window without the delay counting against them.
The 's orders under were pivotal. It clarified: the period from to is excluded from the limitation calculation2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 776.
This exclusion (paused) limitation periods nationwide, binding all courts via 2021 0 Supreme(Ori) 505. Later orders during COVID resurgences reaffirmed this, providing guidelines for proceedings 2021 0 Supreme(Ori) 505.
Distinction matters:- Extension: Adds time after expiry.- Exclusion: Ignores the period entirely, as if it never happened 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 776.
In one excise refund case, the court quashed a rejection for 27-day delay, noting the Commissioner ignored the 's exclusion directive: the period between to was required to be excluded in terms of the directions issued by the in reference to Covid-19 pandemic2024 0 Supreme(J&K) 378.
aligned with the . The issued orders extending and excluding the pandemic period for appeals/petitions 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 466.
The issued notifications mirroring these, excluding pandemic time from limitations and implementing prison decongestion to curb COVID spread 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 466.
In a Kerala land assignment case, the court condoned payment delay due to COVID lockdown, directing review of interest exemptions: the petitioner could not pay the same and he sought for time vide Ext.P19 espousing his absence in Kerala and due to Covid-19 lockdown2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 39959. It referenced orders for guidance, even in administrative matters.
Another Kerala motor vehicle tax refund highlighted limitation starts post-re-registration, but pandemic context influenced timely filings 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 1102.
High Courts elsewhere echoed this. extended periods: the period between till ... all persons shall have a of 90 days
.
These reinforced the uniform approach, benefiting Kerala litigants too.
(Note: Malaysian cases under on property exemptions
,
,
show global parallels but aren't binding in India.)
Relief wasn't unlimited:- Applies only to COVID-linked delays within the excluded period.- Normal rules resumed post-.- Procedural deadlines mainly; substantive rights unaffected.- Pre- or post-period expiries not covered unless specified 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 776.
In tenders, strict adherence prevailed despite COVID: due to Covid-19 pandemic, there was lock down during that period but equity didn't override contract terms 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 120.
Courts should adhere to these precedents; lawmakers might codify future pandemic relief.
This judicial response balanced justice amid crisis. For tailored advice, reach out to a Kerala-based lawyer. Stay informed on evolving laws! 2021 0 Supreme(Ori) 505
#KeralaLaw #COVIDLimitation #LegalExemption
Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020 ["Act 829"]; and (iii) the Third Exemption of 365 days for the period from 1 January 2021 to 31 October 2021 pursuant to s 38C of the Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact ... The application included Form A, outlining the challenges faced and the necessity for a third exemption of 365 days, along with supporting documents.
Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Act 2020 ["Act 829"]; and (iii) the Third Exemption of 365 days for the period from 1 January 2021 to 31 October 2021 pursuant to s 38C of the Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact ... The application included Form A, outlining the challenges faced and the necessity for a third exemption of 365 days, along with supporting documents.
Temporary Measures for Reducing the Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Act 2020 ["Act 829"]; and (iii) the Third Exemption of 365 days for the period from 1 January 2021 to 31 October 2021 pursuant to s 38C of the Temporary Measures for Reducing the ... Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Amendment Act 2022 ["Act A1641"] via letter dated 25 January 2022, wherein the said 365 days in that period would be excluded in the calculation of the time #H....
The petitioner states that on account of the Covid-19 pandemic, the entire State followed the lockdown orders and the life in Kerala came to a standstill during this time. ... The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to declare that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of rent exemption granted under Ext.P5 issued by the Government of Kerala. 2. ... I have also heard the learned Government Pleader representing the State of Kerala. 7. The petitioner is a bona fide tenant of the 2nd....
The Tribunal found that the seniors who were granted exemption had several chances to appear in the test prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, and further, they have appeared in some of the tests conducted even during the pandemic period. ... On 21/10/2023, the Government of Kerala issued an order granting a one-time exemption to the State Government employees who had not passed departmental tests which are necessary for promotion in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic on conditions that, ....
of sixty days, extend the said period by a further period of sixty days: the period between 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021, remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 03.10.2021,is greater than 90 days, that linger period shall has extended the further period of 90 days for computing the p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0
Obviously, the application was delayed by 27 days. It is true that the Commissioner could not have condoned the delay of these 27 days for the reason that the notification would give him only power to condone the delay up to a period of 30 days. ... The Commissioner has not taken note of the fact that the period between 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 was required to be excluded in terms of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in reference to Covid-19 pandemic. ... There is also a provi....
In that case, the maximum condonable period of one year fell within the Covid-19 pandemic and therefore the Kerala High Court has directed consideration for condonation of delay. ... it to direct the Collector to make the reference to it within a period of thirty days. ... Therefore, the pretext of Covid-19 pandemic sought to be put forth by petitioners is totally misplaced and is required to be rejected. 18. Reliance of Mr. Jayabhar on judgment of Kerala High Court i....
Ext.P18 directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,16,396/-, which as per the governing rules had to be paid within a period of one month. The petitioner could not pay the same and he sought for time vide Ext.P19 espousing his absence in Kerala and due to Covid-19 lockdown. ... Necessary guidance as regards the period eligible for exemption can be had from the Orders issued by the Supreme Court, though such orders are not, as such, applicable to administrative matters. ... However, in order to avail ....
Government of Kerala had issued SRO 1729/03 in exercised of the powers conferred by section 10 of the Kerala General Salestax Act, 1963 granting exemption to industrial units under medium and large scale industries and also small scale industrial units for a period of seven years from the date of commencement ... Commissioner of Commercial Taxes rejected the request as per order No.C4-6048/03/CT dated 17-11-2003 on the ground that there was no provision under the Kerala General Salestax Act 1963 or in t....
2. Petitioner is the registered owner of a motor car which was initially registered in Kerala as KL-07/CR-1564. The said vehicle was registered on 16.03.2019, and a one time tax was paid which was valid till 2033. Subsequently, pursuant to a change of residence to Tamil Nadu, a No Objection Certificate [for short, NOC] was obtained on 12.10.2020 and the vehicle was taken to Tamil Nadu and re-registered on 10.03.2021 as TN-10/BM-4299. Thereafter, on 04.03.2022, an application was filed before the second respondent seeking refund of one time tax paid in Kerala. However, by the impugned order d....
2. The complainant made a statement for taking action against Ranjit Singh, Sanjay Gugnani, Kuljeet, Virender Narang alias Raju, Parveen Kumar and Lovely. As per the allegations, there was a dispute with regard to freight of the goods being transported during the COVID period. The allegations are that the freight was hiked and due to non-payment, the goods were not being released by the transporters. It was stated in the FIR that certain armed persons including the petitioner attacked the office of the complainant but as the door was closed they could not enter.
As per the allegations, there was a dispute with regard to freight of the goods being transported during the COVID period. It was stated in the FIR that certain armed persons including the petitioner attacked the office of the complainant but as the door was closed they could not enter. 2. The complainant made a statement for taking action against Ranjit Singh, Sanjay Gugnani, Kuljeet, Virender Narang alias Raju, Parveen Kumar and Lovely. The allegations are that the freight was hiked and due to non-payment, the goods were not being released by the transporters.
Principles of equity and natural justice stay at a distance. There is no dispute that due to Covid-19 pandemic, there was lock down during that period.
Three weeks period provided in the said order expired on 14.02.2020. Even otherwise, the said application cannot be accepted and the time cannot be extended as it will amount to review of my own order and I have no power to recall/review my own order. The position has been made clear by catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. During that period there was no pandemic of COVID-19.
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
