Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal  ||  Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination  ||  Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal  ||  Allahabad High Court: Law Treats All Equally, State Cannot Gain Undue Benefit from Delay Condonation  ||  SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea  ||  SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings  ||  Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside  ||  Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits  ||  NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions    

Matthew and Others v. Sedman and Others - (21 May 2021)

While calculating limitation period in a midnight deadline case, there is complete undivided day following the expiry of deadline which has to be included in the same

Limitation

The Appellants are the present trustees of a Trust (the “Trust”). They replaced the Respondents. Further the Trust had a share in a company called Cattles plc, a listed company. In the year 2008, in the month of April the company published an annual report and rights issue prospectus containing misleading information. Trading in the shares of the listed company was suspended. Consequently in February, 2011, schemes of arrangement were approved in respect of Cattles plc and a subsidiary namely the Welcome Financial Services Limited (“Welcome”). Due to the misleading information in the annual report and the prospectus, the Trust has a claim against Cattles plc and Welcome under the schemes. However under the scheme of arrangement a valid claim could have been made upto midnight on Thursday 2nd June 2011. However the Respondents did not do the same.

The issue in this case was whether a cause of action accrues at or on the expiry of the midnight hour at the end of a day the following day counts towards the calculation of the limitation period

The Court in the present case unanimously dismissed the appeal and observed that in a midnight deadline case, there is a complete undivided day following the expiry of the deadline which has to be included when calculating the limitation period. The claim against Welcome was initiated out of such time.

Tags : MIDNIGHT DEADLINE   LIMITATION PERIOD  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved