AI Overview...
Application for Restoration Filed After Limitation Must Be Accompanied by an Application U/s 5
-
Limitation Period for Restoration Applications - Generally, applications under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC to set aside ex parte decrees must be filed within 30 days from the date of decree. For example, in Dwarika Prasad (D) through LRs. VS Prithvi Raj Singh - Supreme Court, the limitation expired on 11.05.1994 for a decree passed on 11.04.1994.
-
Bar of Limitation and Dismissal - Many cases, such as Gouri Basu VS Durga Nath Bhattacharjee - Calcutta and Nandkishor Kanhyalal Agrawal VS Dhule Municipal Corporation - Bombay, emphasize that if the application for restoration or setting aside ex parte decree is filed beyond the prescribed limitation period without condonation, it is barred and liable to be dismissed.
-
Necessity of Condonation of Delay - Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, condonation of delay is essential when an application is filed late. Several sources (Nandkishor Kanhyalal Agrawal VS Dhule Municipal Corporation - Bombay, Guna Sindhu Choudhury VS Subir Chandra Das - Current Civil Cases, Rajnarainsingh Avadhraj Singh & others VS Vidyadevi Ramraj Singh Kalu Singh & others - Bombay) highlight that failure to file a condonation application or inadequate reasons for delay results in rejection of the restoration application.
-
Application for Condonation Must Be Properly Filed - Courts require that an application seeking condonation should specify sufficient cause. For instance, in Shyam S/o Late Shri Mangi Lal Mandora vs Ugamraj Sand S/o Shri Kewalchand Ji Sand - Rajasthan, the second application for restoration was allowed because it adhered to procedural provisions under the CPC and Limitation Act.
-
Authority to File Restoration/Delay Applications - As per Guna Sindhu Choudhury VS Subir Chandra Das - Current Civil Cases, the applicant or authorized counsel must file the restoration or condonation application. Unauthorized or improperly filed applications are dismissed.
-
Special Laws and Limitation - In some cases, such as under the Securitisation Act (Poonam Garg VS Chief Manager, State Bank of Patiala - Dishonour Of Cheque), the limitation period is governed by specific statutes, and the courts do not have the power to condone delay beyond prescribed periods.
-
Impact of Minor Status and Other Factors - In cases like Madan Lal H vs Ms. Parul Kapil & others - Himachal Pradesh, minors or persons under disability can apply for restoration within the limitation period, but they must also comply with the procedural requirement of filing a condonation application if delayed.
Analysis and Conclusion
-
Main Point: Applications for restoration or setting aside ex parte decrees filed after the prescribed limitation period are generally barred unless accompanied by a proper application for condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
-
Insight: The courts consistently emphasize strict adherence to limitation periods and procedural requirements, including the necessity of filing a condonation application with valid reasons for delay.
-
Conclusion: For a restoration application filed after the limitation period, it is mandatory to file an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Without such an application, the courts are likely to dismiss the application as barred by limitation (Dwarika Prasad (D) through LRs. VS Prithvi Raj Singh - Supreme Court, Gouri Basu VS Durga Nath Bhattacharjee - Calcutta, Nandkishor Kanhyalal Agrawal VS Dhule Municipal Corporation - Bombay, Shyam S/o Late Shri Mangi Lal Mandora vs Ugamraj Sand S/o Shri Kewalchand Ji Sand - Rajasthan, Guna Sindhu Choudhury VS Subir Chandra Das - Current Civil Cases, Poonam Garg VS Chief Manager, State Bank of Patiala - Dishonour Of Cheque, Madan Lal H vs Ms. Parul Kapil & others - Himachal Pradesh, Rajnarainsingh Avadhraj Singh & others VS Vidyadevi Ramraj Singh Kalu Singh & others - Bombay).
References:
- Dwarika Prasad (D) through LRs. VS Prithvi Raj Singh - Supreme Court
- Gouri Basu VS Durga Nath Bhattacharjee - Calcutta
- Nandkishor Kanhyalal Agrawal VS Dhule Municipal Corporation - Bombay
- Shyam S/o Late Shri Mangi Lal Mandora vs Ugamraj Sand S/o Shri Kewalchand Ji Sand - Rajasthan
- Poonam Garg VS Chief Manager, State Bank of Patiala - Dishonour Of Cheque
- ACHARYA DEVENDRAPRASADJI VASUDEOPRASADJI MAHARAJ PANDE VS SADHU MUKTAJIVANDASJI GURU ISHWARDASJI - Gujarat
- Madan Lal H vs Ms. Parul Kapil & others - Himachal Pradesh
- Guna Sindhu Choudhury VS Subir Chandra Das - Current Civil Cases
- Rajnarainsingh Avadhraj Singh & others VS Vidyadevi Ramraj Singh Kalu Singh & others - Bombay
Search Results for "Application for Restoration Filed after Limitation Must be Accompanied by an Application U s 5"
2025 2 Supreme 217 • India - Supreme Court
VIKRAM NATH, PRASANNA B. VARALE
As the ex parte decree was passed on 11.04.1994, limitation for filing the restoration application expired on 11.05.1994. ... High Court has held that the limitation for filing application under Order IX Rule 13 CPC is 30 days and it starts running from date ... application filed by Appellant under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC – Additional Sessions Judge ought not to have exercised revisional ... However, the application was filed by th....
2008 0 Supreme(Cal) 688 • India - Calcutta
PARTHA SAKHA DATTA
parte decree not explained - No application for condonation of delay filed - Application barred by limitation and dismissed. ... . - RESTORATION OF SUIT - ORDER 9 RULE 13(1) C.P.C. - Ex parte decree set aside - Delay in filing application for setting aside ex ... The court held that the application was barred by limitation and dismissed it. ... for condonation of delay has been made, and under Section 3 of the Limitation Act, any su....
2011 0 Supreme(Bom) 1074 • India - Bombay
S.S.SHINDE
under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the respondents herein, had rightly filed the said application for restoration ... ... LIMITATION ACT, 1963 - Section 5 - Applicability of - Section 5 ... No better particulars are given in the application for condonation of delay. ... But the application for condonation of delay filed alongwith restoration application was rejected by the....
2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 1780 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE MUNNURI LAXMAN, J
for restoration of suit - Court clarified that applications must be treated under the correct provisions of CPC, with the first ... (A) Limitation Act, 1963 - Articles 122 and 137 - Writ petition against order allowing applications to restore suit and first ... application dismissed for non-prosecution - Court held that second application falls under Article 137, allowing three years for ... The said second application should have been acco....
• India - Dishonour Of Cheque
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, VIBHU BAKHRU
5—Appeal—Limitation—Condonation of delay—Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal does not have power to condone delay in filing ... Act, 1963 are to be judged not from terms of Limitation Act, 1963, but by provisions of special law. ... of appeal under Section 18 of Securitisation Act—Prescription of a period of limitation under Section 18 ... In the case before the Bombay High Court, the appeal filed under Section 30 was beyond the prescribed period of 30 days and was accompanied by an #HL_....
1965 0 Supreme(Guj) 122 • India - Gujarat
B.J.DIVAN
by limitation and he should have dismissed the restoration applications and should have also dismissed the condonation applications ... the bar of limitation under sec. 3 was saved – With respect to him it was obligatory on him to hold that the restoration applications ... Limitation Act – Sections 5, 14 – Delay – Condonation of – Civil Revision Applications came to be disposed ... the restoration....
2025 Supreme(Online)(HP) 8123 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Ajay Mohan Goel, J
(A) Civil Procedure Code - Order 9, Rule 4; Limitation Act - Section 5 - Restoration of civil suit - Applicants were minors when ... allowed restoration of the suit despite the lapse of limitation. ... be properly accounted for, specifically highlighting the need for a condonation application as required under Section 5 of the Limitation ... , it ought to have been accompanied by an application under Section #HL_S....
• India - Current Civil Cases
T.VAIPHEI, S.C.DAS
) himself/herself has the authority to prefer an application for restoration/re-admission of an appeal and/or condonation of delay ... Limitation Act, 1963—Section 5 Order 3, Rule 1 & 4, Order 6, Rule 14 & 15, Order 16, Rule 6—“Whether an engaged counsel (Advocate ... authority in writing under Rule 4 of Order 3 Full Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court, renders “act” and “doing something” condone delay application ... That was a case in which the plaintiff, after dismissal of his suit, made an ....
2002 0 Supreme(Bom) 1306 • India - Bombay
R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR
Fact of the Case: The petitioners filed an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and restoration ... DELAY CONDONATION - Civil Procedure - Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5, Section 12 - The court dismissed the applications for ... The court discussed the provisions of section 5 and section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and emphasized that the party must apply ... application for res....
• India - High Court of Himachal Pradesh
MR. TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN, J
of periods of limitation on applications - The application under Order 9 Rule 7 is governed by Article 137 which provides three ... to set aside an ex parte order without delay condonation application, raised issues of limitation and good cause. ... (A) Civil Procedure Code - Order 9 Rule 7 and Section 151 - Application for setting aside ex parte order - Petition filed after four ... Thus, if an order has been passed dismissing an application for def....
Filter by Legal Phrase
