Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (0.36 seconds)Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Article 36 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The Limitation Act, 1963
Article 113 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Ramlal, Motilal And Chhotelal vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd on 4 May, 1961
8. It would be of advantage to immediately refer to the decision in Ramlal & Ors. Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd., , where the Court had cautioned against ignoring the difference between Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act. The Supreme Court spoke in these words:
Shakuntala Devi Jain vs Kuntal Kumari And Ors. on 5 September, 1968
"12. A court knows that refusal to condone delay would result in foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This court has held that the words `sufficient cause' under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi Jain Vs. Shakuntala Kumari, and State of W.B. Vs. Administrator, Howrah Municipality, ".
Raghubir Jha vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 7 November, 1983
5. The Apex Court did not consider the applicability of Section 14 and Article 113 of the Limitation Act in Raghubir Jha's case (supra), although the Head Note of the Report indicates so; the judgment is perspicuous and cannot be read as laying down a general principle.
Sha Manmall Misrimall vs K. Radhakrishnan on 7 April, 1971
3. Sha Manmale's case (supra) does not advance the Plaintiff's case; in fact it runs counter to the argument advanced on his behalf. The learned Division Bench observed that since the letters relied upon by the Plaintiff merely called for a Statement of Account, it was no acknowledgment of liability. It was held, on facts that the suit was not barred by limitation
since the payments were made without indicating any particular disability. Significantly, it was also opined that it was obligatory under Order VII, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to clearly plead the grounds upon which the exemption from limitation is claimed. The pleading in this context is to be found in paragraph 63A of the plaint and in my view does not contain sufficient and precise details. It reads as follows :