What is exclusion of time and extension of time under The indian Limitation Act?

 The Indian Limitation Act, 1963 provides two distinct mechanisms to address timing issues in legal proceedings: exclusion of time and extension of time. These provisions ensure fairness and prevent technical delays from defeating genuine legal claims.

Exclusion of Time (Sections 12-15)

Exclusion of time refers to specific periods that are not counted when calculating the limitation period for filing suits, appeals, or applications. This operates automatically and does not require court discretion.

Section 12 - General Exclusion Rules

Section 12 specifies several periods that must be excluded from limitation calculations:

• The day on which the cause of action arises

• The day the judgment being challenged was delivered

• Time taken to obtain a certified copy of the decree, order, or judgment

• Time required to obtain a copy of an arbitral award

The Supreme Court in Parthasarthy v. State of A.P. (AIR 1966 SC) held that Section 12 allows exclusion of time caused by intervening events between the start and end of the limitation period.

Section 13 - Pauper Applications

When someone applies for permission to sue or appeal as a pauper (without paying court fees), the time spent on that application is excluded from the limitation period. This ensures that persons are not unfairly penalized for the time spent waiting for the court's decision on their pauper application.

Section 15 - Other Exclusions

Section 15 covers additional circumstances for time exclusion:

• Time during which proceedings are stayed by injunction or court order

• Notice periods required for suits against the government or public officers

• Time required to obtain consent or sanction when legally mandated

• Time during which the defendant was absent from India

• Periods during insolvency or company winding-up proceedings

Extension of Time (Section 5)

Extension of time is a discretionary power that allows courts to accept appeals or applications even after the prescribed limitation period has expired.

Key Features of Section 5:

Scope of Application: Section 5 applies only to appeals and applications, not to suits. It specifically excludes applications under Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

Sufficient Cause Requirement: The appellant or applicant must satisfy the court that they had "sufficient cause" for not filing within the prescribed period. The term "sufficient cause" is not explicitly defined, allowing courts to interpret it case-by-case. It generally includes circumstances beyond the control of the party, such as illness, incorrect legal advice, or administrative delays.

Court's Discretion: The extension is entirely at the court's discretion. The court must balance the right of the appellant to have their case heard against the need for timely resolution of disputes.

Explanation Clause: The Act specifically states that being misled by any order, practice, or judgment of the High Court in computing the prescribed period may constitute sufficient cause.

Key Differences

Aspect	Exclusion of Time	Extension of Time
Operation	Automatic, no court discretion needed	Requires court's discretionary approval
Application	Suits, appeals, and applications	Only appeals and applications
Basis	Statutory provisions (Sections 12-15)	Court's satisfaction of "sufficient cause"
Purpose	Excludes specific periods from calculation	Condones delay after limitation expires

Both mechanisms serve to prevent genuine cases from being defeated on technical grounds while maintaining the overall framework of timely justice delivery under the Limitation Act, 1963.

Print Page