Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: limitation act 1963 Page 1 of about 533,331 results (0.552 seconds)

Dec 12 1985 (HC)

Deen Dayal Goyal Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-c, and ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : (1986)51CTR(Del)1; [1986]158ITR391(Delhi); 1986RLR124

..... different approach and call for a different interpretation altogether. for the purpose of convenience, the two provisions may be set out side by side :indian limitation act, 1908 limitation act, 1963s. 29(1)..... s. 29(1).....(2) where any special or local law (2) where any special or localprescribes for any suit, appeal or law prescribes for any suit ..... or the numerous decisions thereon which have been rendered in different contexts. we do not propose to dwell upon the impact of the modifications effected by section 29 of the limitation act, 1963, in the corresponding provision of the earlier enactment. we do not also wish to discuss the question whether the language of the new section 29(2) is wide enough ..... he urged that the decisions relied upon for the department were rendered in the light of the provisions of the indian limitation act, 1908, but section 29 of the indian limitation act, 1908, has since been replaced by a new section 29 in the limitation act, 1963. according to him, the two provisions are substantially different and the new provisions which are currently applicable warrant a totally ..... delay in doing so has to be traced either to the provisions of the special statute under consideration or to the provisions of the limitation act, 1963. under the indian income-tax act, 1922, as well as under the 1961 act, there have been a number of decided cases which have consistently held that a delay in the making of an application or the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1995 (HC)

B.P. Sharma Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1995IIAD(Delhi)439; 1995(34)DRJ536

..... meaning of 'notice to the parties of the filing of the award' within the meaning of section 1(2) of the arbitration act, 1940 and article 119(b) of the limitation act,1963.(4) first, the facts in brief. the petitioner contractor had taken the 'work of construction of cd chambers from t-type.m ..... be filed in court, and the court shall thereupon give notice to the parties of the filing of the award. limitation act, 1963 description of suit period of time from which limitation period begins to run. 119. under the arbitration act, 1940 (a) *** *** *** (b) for setting aside an award thirty days the date of service or ..... arbitration proceedings.(13) what is a 'notice of the filing of the award'? the phrase is not to be found defined in the arbitration act or the limitation act. one has to go by the root principles of law and basic tenets of justice in interpreting the meaning of the said phrase. provisions of ..... which was issued to respondent no.1 and referred to hereinabove did not satisfy the requirement of section 14(2) of the arbitration act and article 119(b) of the limitation act. thereforee, in the eye of law, there was no notice issued and served on the respondent.(21) what is the effect in ..... the ex parte decree but in my opinion the bull's eye is else where. section 14 (1) & (2) of the arbitration act and article 119 (b) of the limitation act are reproduced hereunder: arbitrationact, 1940. 14.award to be signed and filed:- (1)when the arbitrators or umpire have made their award, they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 2008 (SC)

T. Kaliamurthi and anr. Vs. Five Gori Thaikal Wakf and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2009SC840; 2008(5)ALLMR(SC)462; (SCSuppl)2009(1)CHN25; JT2008(9)SC115; 2009(1)MhLj43; (2008)7MLJ534(SC); 2008(11)SCALE52; (2008)9SCC306

..... the learned counsel for the respondents, the ensuing discussion on some of the other aspects is very important.27. section 107 provides that nothing in the limitation act, 1963 would apply to any suit for possession of immovable property, comprised in any wakf or for any interest in such property. therefore, for the application ..... parties, if no retrospective effect is given.17. the decision of the appellate court was based on an erroneous application under section 10 of the limitation act, 1963 which was not applicable or relevant to the issues involved in the case and therefore to that extent, the finding of first appellate court was ..... be filed until 31.12.1970 if the transfers were made between 14.8.1947 and 7.5.1954.3. as per section 31 of the limitation act, 1963, it was evident that if the plaintiff's right had not been affected, he could file the suit. it had been stated that the ..... , we may note that the high court, in the impugned judgment, has not given its opinion whether article 96 of the limitation act, 1963 would apply or article 134-b of the limitation act, 1908 would apply in the present case. without going into this, the high court instead held that in view of the ..... wakf properties were by the persons who were holding them in trust and, therefore, on its understanding of the scope of section 10 of the limitation act, 1963 held that the alienations did not meet the legal requirements for a plea of adverse possession against the trust. keeping in mind the findings of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 1996 (HC)

BipIn Vadilal Mehta Vs. Ramesh B. Desai

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1998]92CompCas910(Guj); (1996)3GLR147

..... are averments of fraud in the pleadings was necessary because learned counsel wanted to have shelter under the provisions contained in section 17(1)(b) of the limitation act, 1963. section 17 of the act of 1963 deals with the question of effect of fraud or mistake. it is said that, where, in the case of any suit or application for which a ..... mr. sanjanwala and mr. soparkar are not in a position to urge, successfully, before me that, because they would brand the transaction as void, the period of limitation as provided under the limitation act, 1963, under the relevant article would not be attracted. 39. question (e) : learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the petition requires to be admitted on the ..... applicant to show that the action by the defendant or respondent was fraudulent.' 26. moreover, the question regarding reasonable diligence as understood within the meaning of section 17 of the limitation act, 1963, also requires to be considered. as made clear by the madras high court in ramanathapuram market committee v. east india corporation ltd., : air1976mad323 , by the use of the ..... high court pronouncement in marappa gounder, in re, : air1959mad26 , three things have been prescribed for a person desiring to invoke the aid of section 18 of the limitation act, 1908, equivalent to section 17 of the limitation act, 1963. the madras high court based the principle thus (headnote) : 'a person desiring to invoke the aid of this section must establish three things, viz., (1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1978 (HC)

Ramanbhai Trikamlal Vs. Vaghri Vaghabhai Oghabhai and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1979Guj149; (1979)0GLR268

..... kinds, and articles 181, 182 and 183 were all included in the third division of the indian limitation act of 1908.4. the indian limitation act, 1908 was repealed by the limitation act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 1963 limitation act). under the scheme of the schedule to the limitation act of 1963, the first division of the schedule related to suits, and in this first division, there are ..... a civil court and hence is an 'order' of a civil court even according to ordinary meaning of the word 'order'. therefore, so far as, the limitation act, 11908 and the limitation act, 1963, are both concerned, it must be held that an award passed by a debt adjustment court is an order of a civil court.9. but before art. ..... the statement of objects and reasons to the bill mentions:'the limitation act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 1963 act) repealed and re-enacted with modifications the provisions of the indian limitation act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 1908 act). clause (a) of section 30 of the 1963 act provides a special period of limitation in respect of suits relating to causes of action which had ..... it is necessary to, refer to some of the provisions of the bombay agricultural debtors' relief act, 1947 and some of the provisions of the indian limitation act, 1908 and the limitation act 1963. the bombay agricultural debtors' relief act, hereafter called the b.a.d.r. act, was enacted because the legislature thought it expedient to consolidate and amend the law for the relief .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1984 (HC)

Sendamarai Animalv Vs. Vijaya Rajagopal Chettiar

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1984Mad122; (1984)1MLJ324

..... that arose was whether. with reference to the cause of action stated to have arise in 1966, after the coming into force of the limitation act 1963, art. 57 of the limitation act 1963 could be applied in bar of the suit, and art. 2262 of the french code civil providing for a period of 30 years, ..... daman and diu only is 'local law within the meaning of s. 29(2) of the limitation act 1963. as stated earlier these provisions have to be read into the limitation act 1963, as if the schedule to the limitation act is amended mutatis mutandis. no question of repugnancy arises. we agree with the judicial commissioner that the ..... petitioner. it is necessary to point out that the court below was to error in proceeding to apply the residuary art. 113 of the limitation act 1963. the residuary article can be applied only in the event of the inapplicability of any other article and the circumstance that the mortgage deed contains ..... applicability of art. 2262 of the french code civil was negatived on the ground that the cause of action arose only in 1966 when the limitation act, 1963 governed the right to institute the suit and not french code civil. with respect, this does not appear to be the right approach to the ..... the amount due under the mortgage dated 21-5-1969 executed by the petitioner is in time. on the footing that the provisions of the limitation act 1963, would apply, the relevant article applicable would be art. 62, which runs as under:'62 to enforce payment of money secured by a mortgage .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 2000 (HC)

Mrs. Pushpa P. Mulchandani and ors. (All Petitioners Through Constitut ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2001(2)ARBLR284(Bom); 2001(1)BomCR592; (2001)1BOMLR169; 2000(4)MhLj819

..... is no rule corresponding or equivalent to rule 789.21. the contention of mr. bulchandani based on section 21 of the limitation act also appears to be unsound. in the first place, section 21 of the limitation act, 1963 applies to suits. in the limitation act, 1963, 'suit' has been specifically defined in section 2(1) as not including an appeal or an application. section 2(b) ..... gathered only if there were express words of exclusion. since there are no express words of exclusion. mr. bulchandani contends that the provisions of sections 4 to 24 of the limitation act, 1963 would continue to apply. the judgment of the supreme court in hukumdev narain yadav v. lalit narain mishra, and mohd., ashfaq v. state transport appellate tribunal u. p. and ..... insurance corporation of india, and held that the alteration of the division as well as the change in the collocation of words in article 137 of the limitation act, 1963 compared with article 181 of the 1908 limitation act showed that applications contemplated under article 137 are not applications confined to the code of civil procedure. the words 'any other application' under article 137 ..... taken out was very much within three years and, therefore, no objection could have been taken by the respondents thereto. reliance is also placed on section 21 of the limitation act, 1963 to contend that the effect contemplated by sub-section (1) thereto would apply, that the omission to make haresh melwani a party to the arbitration petition was a mistake .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1976 (HC)

Rupam Pictures and anr. Vs. Brijmohan and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1977Bom425; 1977MhLJ298

..... concerned in this case to decide whether the time taken by respondent no. 1 in prosecuting his application in muzaffarnagar court could be excluded under section 14(2) of the limitation act, 1963. nor do we propose to decide whether the application under section 20 could be defeated on the ground of the extinction of the liability of the company under clause 19 ..... -1969 : (1969)iillj651sc . it seems to us that it may require serious consideration whether applications to courts under other provisions, apart from civil procedure code are included within article 137 of the limitation act, 1963, or not.' the high court of delhi in union of india v. risri raj & co., delhi : air1973delhi15 has held that in view of the decision of the supreme court in ..... is mine) in this decision in the clearest terms it is laid down by the supreme court that there was no limitation prescribed for filing an application under section 20 of the, arbitration act under the indian limitation act, 1908, or in the limitation act, 1963. article 181 of the former did not govern such an application, but the period of 3 years prescribed in article 137 ..... 352. clause 19 has not prescribed a period of 12 months for the filing of an application under section 20 of the act. there was no limitation prescribed for the filing of such an application under the indian limitation act, 1908 or the limitation act 1963 article 181 of the former did not govern such an application. the period of three years prescribed in article 137 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 2008 (HC)

Uco Bank, Churchgate Branch Through Mr. K. Venkatachalam Vs. Kanji Man ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(2)ALLMR512; 2008(3)BomCR290; (2008)110BOMLR744; 2008(4)MhLj424

..... extinguished, he has no right to object to the procedure of sale.58. we shall now turn to the second question pertaining to application of limitation act, 1963.59. under section 5 of the limitation act, 1963, any appeal or any application other than an application under any of the provisions of order xxi of the code of civil procedure, 1908, ..... from the date of order of acquittal. there was delay in filing application. the corporation, therefore, made an application for condonation of delay invoking section 5 of the limitation act, 1963. the delhi high court condoned the delay. the appeal was then heard and mangu ram was convicted and sentenced. being aggrieved by the conviction, the matter was ..... ram v. delhi municipality : 1976crilj179 and union of india v. popular construction co. : air2001sc4010 and contended that the provisions of limitation act, 1963 stand excluded only when there is an express bar to application of the limitation act, 1963 in special statute under consideration.29. mr. bulchandani submitted that the judgments on which reliance is placed by the petitioner have no ..... accordance with the provisions of the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act, 1993 (for short, 'the drt act') and the rules made thereunder. the drt act under section 24 makes the provisions of limitation act, 1963 applicable to drt. therefore, provisions of limitation act, 1963 are applicable both to secured creditors and borrowers to avoid discrimination.26. he submitted that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 1999 (HC)

Nagorao Narayan Diewane Since Deceased Through Heirs Vs. Narayan Awadu ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(1)ALLMR555; 2000(4)BomCR165; (2000)1BOMLR857; 2000(2)MhLj273

..... is submitted that the trial court has committed an error in law in decreeing the suit inasmuch as the suit was hopelessly barred by limitation. that the bar of limitation under section 3(1) of the limitation act, 1963 is that subject to the provisions contained in section 4 to 24 (inclusive), every suit instituted, appeal preferred and application made after prescribed ..... has rightly placed reliance on a decision reported in : air1991ker83 , and ajab enterprises v. jayant vagoiles and chemicals, : air1991bom35 . section 34 of limitation act, 1963 makes it clear which reads as under :'3) bar of limitation sub-section (i)subject to the provisions contained in section 4 to 24 (inclusive) every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made after the prescribed ..... suit for declaration is hopelessly barred by time as the same is filed beyond the time prescribed under article 58 of limitation act, 1963. that both the courts below have failed to follow the mandatory provisions contained in section 3 of the limitation act, 1963. he placed reliance on a decision reported in ashwin jalal v. municipal corpn. of greater mumbai, : air1999bom35 and ..... the cause of action arose in the year 1954 or 1961 when plaintiff came to know that defendant was intending to betray the plaintiff.54. article 58 of limitation act of 1963 is however, wider in scope and range than the combined articles. being a residuary article relating to declaratory suit, it will now govern all suits for declaration .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //