Section 5 Limitation Act - CaseCiter

CaseCiter

Sign in

Section 5 Limitation Act

A collection of 13 posts

Vinod Gandhi v. District Collector, Madurai - Limitation Act - Delay Condonation - State Interest

Limitation Act - Section 5 - Delay Condonation - The interest of State cannot suffer for the acts of omission/commission of its officers. [Context: Supreme Court refused to interfere with Madras High Court order condoning a very long delay in filing a review petition by the District Collector, Madurai,

The Property Company (P) Ltd. v. Rohinten Daddy Mazda; 2026 INSC 33 - Companies Act - CLB - S.5 Limitation Act - Delay Condonation Power

The Property Company (P) Ltd. v. Rohinten Daddy Mazda; 2026 INSC 33 - Companies Act - CLB - S.5 Limitation Act - Delay Condonation Power

Note You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register by clicking here: Companies

Jyotsna Kanoongo v. Shailendra Kanoongo - Limitation - Condonation of Delay - Service Of Notice

Jyotsna Kanoongo v. Shailendra Kanoongo - Limitation - Condonation of Delay - Service Of Notice

Limitation Act 1963- Section 5 - While considering the cause for delay, it is the sufficient cause which would be of paramount consideration. Neither the length of delay nor the number of days of delay would be relevant. If the cause shown is sufficient, the delay irrespective of length, ought

State of Jharkhand & Ors. vs Azadul Haque - S.5 Limitation Act - Administrative Delay

Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Certain amount of latitude requires to be extended when administrative delay is pleaded - the State being an impersonal machinery moves at a snail’s pace, there will be no personal interest of the officials in withholding the file. Even when there is

Shivamma (D) vs Karnataka Housing Board 2025 INSC 1104 - S.5 Limitation Act

Limitation Act 1963 - Section 5 --For the purpose of condonation of delay in terms of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the delay has to be explained by establishing the existence of “sufficient cause” for the entirety of the period from when the limitation began till the actual date

Methkupally Venkatamma vs M. Padmamma - Delay Condonation - Betrayal Of Trust

Note You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register by clicking here: Limitation

Inder Singh vs State Of Madhya Pradesh 2025 INSC 382 - Condonation Of Delay

Limitation Act - Section 5 - All parties, whether or not State under Article 12 of the Constitution, are required to act with due diligence and promptitude- delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, but a major aspect which has to be kept in mind is that, if in a

Surendra Kumar Jain vs Santobai 2025 INSC 230 - S 5 Limitation Act

Limitation Act 1961 - Section 5 - High Court allowed application seeking condonation of delay of 2,422 days in filing an application under Order XLI Rule 19 CPC - Allowing appeal, SC observed: High Court recorded no reason for condoning huge delay in filing application for restoration of the

Kumari Sahu Vs Bhubanananda Sahu - S 5 Limitation Act - Delay - Advocate's Fault

Limitation Act - Section 5- Delay Condonation - Advocate's Fault

H.Guruswamy vs A. Krishnaiah 2025 INSC 53 - S 5 Limitation Act - Condonation Of Delay

Limitation Act 1963- Section 5 -While considering the plea for condonation of delay, the court must not start with the merits of the main matter. The court owes a duty to first ascertain the bona fides of the explanation offered by the party seeking condonation. It is only if the

Section 5 Limitation Act

State of Madhya Pradesh vs Ramkumar Choudhary 2024 INSC 932 - Limitation -Delay Condonation

Limitation Act 1963 - Section 5 -Where a case has been presented in the Court beyond limitation, the petitioner has to explain the Court as to what was the "sufficient cause" which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the Court within limitationh-The discretion

Rajneesh Kumar Vs Ved Prakash 2024 INSC 891 - Limitation Act -Delay Condonation - Negligence Of Lawyer

Limitation Act 1963 - Section 5 -Tendency on the part of the litigants to blame their lawyers of negligence and carelessness in attending the proceedings before the court - Even if we assume for a moment that the concerned lawyer was careless or negligent, this, by itself, cannot be a

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

HPCL Bio -Fuels Ltd. vs Shahaji Bhanudas Bhad 2024 INSC 851 - Section 11 Arbitration Act - Order 23 Rule 1 CPC - Section 5, 14 Limitation Act

Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996- Section 11 ; Code Of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order 23 Rule 1- An application under Section 11(6) of the Act, 1996 is not a suit and hence will not be governed stricto-sensu by Order 23 Rule 1 of the CPC. However, the principles underlying