The Supreme Court, in a recent judgment, has clarified that its orders extending the limitation period during the COVID-19 pandemic also apply to the period up to which delay can be condoned. This decision came in response to an order from the Calcutta High Court that had refused to accept a written submission due to delay.
The apex court’s bench, comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan, emphasized the extraordinary circumstances of the pandemic. They stated,
“When the whole world was in the grip of a devastating pandemic, it could never have been said that the parties were sleeping over their rights. It is, at this juncture, that this Court stepped in and after taking suo motu cognizance passed orders under Article 142 of the Constitution of India extending the deadlines.”
The court further noted that the legal maxim
“Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt,”
which translates to
“the law assists those who are vigilant, not those who sleep over their rights,”
would not be applicable in this context.
The case in question revolved around the Calcutta High Court’s refusal to accept a written statement on record, filed by the defendants in a suit for the recovery of money. The High Court had based its decision on the fact that the period of 30 days to file the written statements had expired on 08.03.2020. The High Court had also relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sagufa Ahmed and Others Vs. Upper Assam Plywood Products Private Limited and Others to argue that the order extending the limitation applied only to ‘the period of limitation’ and not the period up to which delay could be condoned.
However, the Supreme Court pointed out that its order from 08.03.2021 expanded the protection provided by its previous orders. This expansion also excluded the period for computing outer limits within which the court or tribunal can condone delay. The court remarked,
“..the very basis of the judgment in Sagufa Ahmed (supra) that under the 23.03.2020 order, only the period of limitation has been extended and not the period up to which delay can be condoned, has been taken away by expanding the protection by excluding the period even for computing outer limits within which the court or tribunal can condone delay.”
The Supreme Court, therefore, set aside the order of the High Court and allowed the appeal. They concluded that the applications filed by the applicants on 19.01.2021 were well within time when considering the orders from 08.03.2021 and subsequent orders.
Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose represented the appellants, while Advocate Sahil Tagotra appeared for the respondent.
Case Title: Aditya Khaitan & Ors. V. IL and FS Financial Services Limited.
