Legal

____________________________________________________________________

This Blog is written by Srishti Tiwari from University School of Law and Legal Studies, GGSIU, Delhi. Edited by Yash Jain.

____________________________________________________________________

1. INTRODUCTION: IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION

The current wide prevailing COVID-19 pandemic has forced restrictive measures on the movement of people across the country to contain the outbreak and rapid spread of the virus, consequently also bringing the functioning of courts/tribunals to a standstill. Considering the gravity of the situation, where courts have become physically inaccessible, making it impossible to file appeals, etc. within the prescribed time, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on March 23, 2020, took Suo Moto cognizance of a petition seeking an extension of Limitation under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, passed an order directing the extension of the limitation period running under all general and special laws, with effect from March 15, 2020, mindful of the adversities faced by the litigants in approaching the courts amidst the Coronavirus pandemic.

In this respect, the March 23 order passed by the three-Judge Bench of CJI Bobde and Justices L Nageswara Rao and Surya Kant read:

“To obviate such difficulties and to ensure that lawyers/litigants do not have to come physically to file such proceedings in respective Courts/Tribunals across the country including this Court, it is hereby ordered that a period of limitation in all such proceedings, irrespective of the limitation prescribed under the general law or Special Laws whether condonable or not shall stand extended w.e.f. 15th March 2020 till further order/s to be passed by this Court in present proceedings.” [1]

2. ‘PERIOD OF LIMITATION’ UNDER SECTION 2 (J)

It means a period of limitation stipulated for any suit, appeal, or application under the Limitation Act schedule, which covers several claims and their timelines within which action can be brought to the court of justice. Limitation periods exist to bring certainty and finality to the Legal Dispute and to prevent parties argues over historical events where a fair trial could not be held. The consequent effect of all such Laws of Limitation specifies for the period after which a lawsuit cannot be taken to a court of justice. That period is called the Limitation period, and any legal action brought to the Courts/ Tribunals after such time is barred by Limitation.

Section 9 of the Limitation Act

Under Limitation Act 1963, where once time commences, it runs continuously and without any break in any case until the entire specified period has run out and will not cease by reasons of any subsequent disability. The aforementioned SC order is an exception to Section 9 of the Limitation Act 1963 as it particularly, “pauses” the limitation clock after it has begun because of the pandemic situation and inaccessibility of Courts/Tribunals to litigants.

3. SPECIAL POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT UNDER ART. 142 OF THE CONSTITUTION

The above- said order is passed by the Supreme Court of India invoking its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution which provides that “the Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it…”[2] read with Article 141 of the Constitution of India, making this order a binding order on all Courts/Tribunals and authorities, providing the much-needed relief to the litigants.

Complete Justice

Pertinently, the meaning of “complete justice” has been talked about exhaustively in numerous judgements. The Supreme Court considered it necessary to intervene in issues concerning the protection of the environment, history, deprived section of society, religion, and hence fill the lacunas in current laws for upholding justice, keeping intact the Fundamental Rights of the citizens.

4 CASES CONCERNING APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 142 BY THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Union Carbide Case also called the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case

In this case, victims of the Bhopal Gas tragedy were awarded compensation of $470 million by the Court to do complete justice to bring relief to the thousands of persons affected during the black night. The Court went to the extent of saying that, it can even override laws made by parliament.

Babri Masjid Demolition Case

In its 2017 judgment, Supreme Court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to transfer the criminal trial from Rae Bareli to Lucknow, on account of the case pending for 25 years, and called it an “Evasion of Justice”. The court also cited the provision to direct that Nirmohi Akhara should be assigned “an appropriate role” in framing the temple building scheme. That was despite Nirmohi Akhara’s suit being held to be barred by limitation.

Coal Block Allocation Case

In 2014, Article 142 of the Constitution was again invoked to cancel the allocation of Coal blocks granted from 1993 onwards, without any single finding on the wrong doing by those who were allotted these blocks.

Sale of Liquor Banned on National Highways

In 2016, the Supreme Court banned the Sale of Alcohol and ensure that liquor vends are not visible or directly accessible from the highway within a specified distance of 500 meters along National Highways only by invoking Article 142 of the Constitution. The reason given by the Court was to avoid accidents.

In the case of Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India [3], “the Court said therein that the said article could not be used to supplant the existing law, but only to supplement the law”.

More recently, in the case of Nidhi Kaim & Anr vs State of MP And Others [4], the Supreme Court noted that “there cannot be any defined parameters, within the framework whereof, this Court would exercise jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution. The complexity of administration, and human affairs, would give room for the exercise of the power vested in this Court under Article 142, in a situation where clear injustice appears to have been caused, to any party to a dispute. In the absence of any legislation to the contrary, it would be open to this Court, to remedy the situation”. Therefore, over the last few years, Article 142 of the Constitution has become a pivotal part of the Supreme Court that is regularly invoked to resolve the case for achieving complete justice.

5. IMPACT: INDEFINITE EXTENSION OF DUE DATES BY SUPREME COURT

As far as the prescribed limitation period is concerned, the order would have an overriding effect on all the country’s legal regulations, including IP Laws. This SC order has opened up new avenues and therefore allowed the legal extension of cases not statutorily accessible. That does not, however, mean that there is a blanket ban on the Limitation period.  It merely means that the Limitation period is currently suspended and will commence after lock-down has been lifted.  Besides this, the Court also specifies that the limitation period is suspended w.e.f. 15.03.2020, so any previously filed proceedings would not be safeguarded.

The extension of the stipulated period for in case of Section 29A of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 is beyond 15th March 2020 till the lockdown opens and an additional time of 15 days thereafter, will protect the interest of the parties but will also forestall additional filing of applications at the end of the parties to the Arbitration. It should be noted that while passing the Order, the Court has exercised its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution. From a mere perusal of the Order, it is clear that it applies to day-to-day adjudication and does not apply to urgent matters. It is fair to mention here that this development will have a significant impact on the period of Limitation prescribed in the various statutes. This ambiguity about what is going to happen has the potential to adversely affect people who’ve been exploring their future liability.

To calculate the restriction, the date from 15 March 2020 shall not be counted. The Order would essentially ensure that when the limitation duration for litigants ends during these difficult times when courts cannot be accessed physically, their right to approach the Court does not get blotted out.

6. ANALYSIS

From the SC order, it is clear that extensions will apply to proceedings for which the limitation period ends during the operation of the order, however, does not provide clarity with concerning whether the extensions will be provided for the time when courts were inaccessible, to proceedings for which limitation period will end after SC order gets lifted. Considering this order is an exception to Section 9 of the Limitation Act 1963 and the stand taken by the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Bar Association case with respect to the extent of power exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution, a strict interpretation of the SC order should be adopted. A cautious interpretation of the SC order would mean that extensions would only apply to filings for which the limitation period ends during the subsistence of the SC order.

Due to the Covid-19 outbreak across the country over the last few weeks, litigants have faced significant logistical challenges. Even before the lockdown/ curfew was announced, filing counters were already thinly functional at courts/tribunals. There was a lack of clarification about the implications of non-filing within the limit. This Supreme Court step can be seen as a prompt relief to anyone who is due to make filings in different Courts/Tribunals and who is unable to be physically present in court, or who undertakes any travel for those filings because of the ‘lockdown’ measures which. This acts as a praiseworthy relief measure taken by the Supreme Court.

7. CONCLUSION

The sudden suspension of the regular functioning of vital public services such as courts also raises the wider problem of increasing public access to courts, not just through physical access, but also through the use of technology The current crisis has brought to the forefront the essential need which requires IT infrastructure of courts at all levels to be strengthened immediately for which the Hon’ble Supreme Court took a list of measures like uniform introduction of E-Filing for all Courts and Tribunals, improving video conferencing services and standardizing platforms for all judicial platforms to make it easier for the public to access case-related information are only a few simple and effective ways to integrate E-Courts. Not only will these measures help prevent more problems that could result from potential force majeure incidents and will greatly increase productivity and dramatically extend court access to large parts of the population where it remains insufficient.

8. REFERENCES

[1]Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No(s).3/2020 fi

[2]Article 142 of the Indian Constitution

[3]Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409

[4]Nidhi Kaim & Anr. vs State of MP And Others AIR 2017 SC 986