Commissioner, M.P. Housing Board and Others v. M/s. Mohanlal and Company - (Supreme Court) (25 Jul 2016)

Rescue under the provision is for bona fide litigious activity

Limitation

In instant case, Appellant was aggrieved by order of Additional District Judge allowing Respondent’s application under Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963, seeking exclusion of the time consumed in the proceedings. In civil revision, High court gave the stamp of approval to the same.

It is settled law that, Section 14 of Act applies to Section 34(3) of Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996. Object of section 14 is to exempt a certain period covered by a bona fide litigious activity. There has to be a liberal interpretation to advance the cause of justice. However, it has also been laid down that it would be applicable in cases of mistaken remedy or selection of a wrong forum. As per the conditions enumerated, the earlier proceeding and the latter proceeding must relate to the same matter in issue. Prosecution of the prior proceeding should also show due diligence and good faith.

Supreme Court opined that, liberal interpretation should be placed on Section 14 of the Act, but if the fact situation exposits absence of good faith of great magnitude, law should not come to the rescue of such a litigant.

Relevant : Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department and others Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963

Tags : DELAY CONDONATION BONA FIDE LITIGIOUS ACTIVITY