The sense of the word ‘limitation’ is obvious. In its most literal sense, the word limitation refers to a constraint, a law, or restricted circumstances. The law of limitation has been described as the time limit that an aggrieved party has to file a lawsuit in order to seek relief or justice from the court.

Though it is not required of any person to master the numerous provisions that have been given for limitation in various suit matters, it is mandatory to have some basic knowledge of the law of limitation.

The basic principle of restriction refers to ‘the setting or advising of a time limit for legal acts to be taken’. ‘Time of limitation’ means the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal, or application by the Schedule, and ‘prescribed period’ means the period of limitation determined in accordance with the provisions of this Act, according to Section 2 (j) of the Limitation Act, 1963.

The Law of Limitation refers to preventing various civil cases from being brought against an aggrieved individual after the last date for filing a suit and seeking redress or righteousness before a judge. The rule of limitation will apply to any suit filed after the statute of limitations has expired. The primary and fundamental goal of the law of limitation is to secure the lengthy process of indirectly penalizing an individual who has not committed any wrongdoing.

The Limitation Act, 1859, and later the Limitation Act, 1963, were passed on the 5th of October, 1963, and came into force on the 1st of January, 1964, for the purpose of consolidating and amending the legal principles relating to the limitation of suits and other legal proceedings.

Even if the restriction is not presented as a defense, the act provides that the case that is brought, the appeal that is heard, and the requests that are made after the prescribed time are dismissed. It is a suit that is started when a complaint is made to any of the appropriate officers in a normal case and the individual is a pauper. In other instances, a suit is started where a request for leave to file a suit as a pauper is made, and when cases relating to allegations made against a corporation that is being wound up by a court are filed, and where the claimant initially submitted his assertions to the official liquidator. When an allegation is made in the form of set-off or counterclaim, it is treated as a separate lawsuit, and in the case of set-off, it is often treated as having begun on the day the preceding for set-off is pleaded. It can be assumed that in the case of an additional allegation, a lawsuit must be filed on the same day as the counterclaim is filed. When the application is given to the appropriate officer of that particular Court, an appeal is made in the High Court by notice of motion.

When a court is closed on the expiry date for filing any shoot to kill or application search suits API law application may be initiated on the reopening day of the court. The court will admit an appeal or application after the stated time if the litigant convinces the court that there was insufficient reason for the failure to prepare a pill application within the specified period. It is a litigant’s responsibility to provide adequate justification for his failure to file a suit appeal or submission. Aside from that, the act states that a person who has the power to file a suit or make a request for the execution of a defendant who is a minor, psychotic, or a fool at the time the suit or request is filed is to be considered. He may be required to file a suit or application during the same period after his disability has ended, or within the time within which the prescribed term is to be considered, she may be required to file legal proceedings or applications within the same time after each of his disabilities has ended. Where else, if a person’s incapacity or disability lasts until his death, the act confers authority on the person’s legal representatives to take legal action or file a claim after his death within the same time span.

The legal disability shall not apply to any suits filed for the right of pre-emption or the limitation period, and which are to be extended for a period and under certain conditions, as specified by the Act. When determining the limitation duration for any lawsuit, appeal, or application, the date on which the period is to be calculated is deemed to be excluded. The date of a suit for review, correction, or appeal of a judgement is determined from the date the judgement is issued, and the time of the request for a copy of the decree, or order appealed from, amended, or reviewed is exempted. Other provisions of the Act include the calculation of limitations for suits against trustees, the execution of a decree, and the consequence of fraud. The Act specifies the purchase of an easement by prescription for the uninterrupted use of land for a period of twenty years.

The terms of the Indian Contract Act of 1872 are unaffected by the Limitation Act of 1963. The Act is in place because it limits the court’s ability to hear frivolous cases and prevents the complainants from having to wait a long time for their cases to be heard.

The salient features are-

There are 32 sections and 137 articles in the Limitation Act. The papers are divided into ten parts. The first section is about accounts, the second section is about contracts, the third section is about declarations, the fourth section is about decrees and instruments, and the fifth section is about an immovable property, the sixth section is about a movable property, the seventh section is about torts, the eighth section is about trusts and trust property, the ninth section is about miscellaneous matters, and the last section is about suits with no time limit.

The suits in which the classifications have been attempted do not all have the same limitations. In the case of a suit by the mortgagor for the restitution or recovery of possession of the immovable property mortgaged, or in the case of mortgages for foreclosure, or suits by or on behalf of the Central Government or any State Government, including the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the limitation period is reduced from 60 years to 30 years.

Although various kinds of suits relating to immovable property, trusts, and endowments have a longer period of 12 years, suits relating to accounts, contracts, and declarations, suits relating to decrees and instruments, and suits relating to movable property have a shorter period of 3 years.

Suits relating to torts and miscellaneous matters, as well as suits for which no period of limitation is given anywhere in the Schedule to the Act, have a period of limitation ranging from one to three years.

It is to be interpreted as the Act’s minimum seven-day timeframe for appealing a death sentence imposed by the High Court or the Court of Session in the exercise of original jurisdiction, which has been increased to 30 days from the date of sentence imposed.

One of the most notable features of the Limitation Act of 1963 is that it is required to avoid illustrations based on the Third Report of the Law Commission on the Limitation Act of 1908, as the illustrations provided are often needless and misleading. The Limitation Act of 1963 has a very broad scope, encompassing nearly all court proceedings. The term“application” has been broadened to include any petition, whether original or not. The language of Sections 2 and 5 of the Limitation Act of 1963 has been modified to cover all petitions as well as applications under special laws.

The definitions of ‘application,’ ‘plaintiff,’ and ‘defendant’ in the new Act have been expanded to include not just the individual by whom the application was made. The term “plaintiff” or “defendant” refers to an individual whose estate is represented by an executor, trustee, or other representatives.

Suing foreign rulers, ambassadors, and envoys needs the approval of the Central Government, according to Sections 86 and 89 of the Civil Procedure Code. When computing the period of limitation for filing such suits, the Limitation Act of 1963 provides that the time spent receiving such consent shall be removed.

Since both Hindu and Muslim law are now available under the law of limitation as per the current statute book, the Limitation Act, 1963, with its new law, signifies that it makes no racial or class distinction.

The Supreme Court held in the case of Syndicate Bank v. Prabha D. Naik, that the rule of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963 does not make any ethnic or class distinction when creating or indulging any law to any specific individual.

READ ALSO: Distinction between order, decree and judgment