Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

CGR, J

(i) It is apt to refer to judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in M.P.Steel Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Excise1, which discussed the phrase 'due diligence' and 'good faith' for the purpose of invocation of Section 14 of the Act. Relevant portion of Paragraphs 10 and 49 of the said judgment reads as under:-

"10. We might also point out that Conditions 1 to 4 mentioned in the Consolidated Engg. case [(2008) 7 SCC 169] have, in fact, been met by the appellant. It is clear that both the prior and subsequent proceedings are civil proceedings prosecuted by the same party. The prior proceeding had been prosecuted with due diligence and in good faith, as has been explained in Consolidated Engg. [(2008) 7 SCC 169] itself. These phrases only mean that the party who invokes Section 14 should not be guilty of negligence, lapse or inaction. Further, there should be no pretended mistake intentionally made with a view to delaying the proceedings or harassing the opposite party.

(ii) The principles pertaining to applicability of Section 14 of Limitation Act were extensively discussed and summarized by Hon'ble Apex Court in Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department and others2, wherein it was observed as follows:

"21. Section 14 of the Limitation Act deals with exclusion of time of proceeding bona fide in a court without jurisdiction. On analysis of the said section, it becomes evident that the following conditions must be satisfied before Section 14 can be pressed into service: