LIMITATIONS IN THE CATEGORY OF THE CASES PERTAINS TO CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL JURISDICTION

CATEGORY	ART. /RULE/ SECTION	LIMITATION	TIME FROM WHICH PERIOD BEGINS TO RUN
1] FIRST APPEAL  (CPC)	Art.116 (a) of Limitation Act, 1963	90 Days	The date of the decree or order.
	R.15(2) of Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948	30 Days	The date of the decree or order.
a. Land Acquisition Act.	Art. 116 of Limitation Act.	90 Days	The date of the decree or order.
b. Employees State Insurance Act.	Sec. 82 (3) ESI Act.	60 Days	From the date of order
c. Railway Claims Tribunal Act.	Sec. 23 (3) of RCT Act.	90 Days	From the date of order
d. Motor Vehicles Act.	Sec. 173(1) of MV Act.	90 Days	From the date of order
e. Workmen's Compensation Act.	Sec. 30 (20 Workmen's Compensation Act. Sec.30(3) Section 5 of the Limitation Act is applicable	60 Days	From the date of order
f. The Copy Right Act.	Sec. 72(2) The Copy Right Act	3 Months	From the date of order
g. Securities & Exchange Board of India Act.	Sec. 15z of SEBI Act	60 Days, If prevented by sufficient cause to file within 60 days further period not exceeding 60 days.	From the date of communication  of the decision or order to him.
h. Maharashtra 8 Electricity & Regulatory Commission Act.	Sec. 27 of MERC Act.	60 Days	----
i. Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.	Sec. 35 of FERA	60 days, If sufficient cause shown for further 60 days.	-----
j. Family Court Appeals Act.	Sec. 19 (3) of Family Courts Appeal Act.	30 Days.	From the date of judgment or order
k. Cross objection in Appeal	Order (41) of CPC R.22	30 Days.	Within one month from the date of service notice on him or his pleader of the day fixed par hearing of appeal or within  such further time as the appellate court may allow.
2] SECOND APPEAL (CPC)	Art.116 of Limitation  Act.	90 Days.	The date of the decree or order.
3] LETTERS PATENT APPEAL	Bombay High Court (A.S.) Rules Provisions of L.P.A. and Order 41 of CPC (117 Art.)	30 Days.	From  the date of order.
4] APPEAL FROM ORDER	----	District - 90 Days. Bombay - 30 Days.	From  the date of order. From  the date of order.
5] CIVIL REVISION  APPLICATION(CPC)	Art. 131 of Limitation Act.	90 Days.	The date of the decree or order or sentence sought to be revised.
6] APPLICATIONS
a. Application for setting aside Registrar's order  Revision of orders of Reg & Addl. Reg by motion u/ Chapter II, Rule 7	Bombay High Court (A.S) Rules Chapter XII Rule-2 Chapter II Rule - 7	7 Days. 15 Days.	From the date of order complained of From the date of order  complained of
b. For bringing L.Rs. on record	Art. 120	90 Days.	The date of death of the plaintiff , appellant , defendant or respondent , as the case may be.
c. For setting aside abatement	Art. 121	60 Days.	The date of abatement.
d. For leave to appeal as a pauper(a) to the High Court	Art.130	60 Days.	The date of decree appealed from.
e. To the High Court for a certificate of fitness of appeal to the Supreme Court clause 1 of Art. 132, 133 etc.	Art, 132 of Limitation Act	60 Days.	The date of the decree , order or sentence.
f. Application for restoration of appeal, application Review, Revision dismissed for default, want  of prosecution.	Art. 123 of Limitation Act.	30 Days.	The date of the decree or where the summons or notice was not duly served, when the aplicant had knowledge of the decree.
g. Appeal under Sec. 35G(2) of Central Excise Act.	35G(2)(a)	180 Days.	From the date on which order appealed against is received by commissioner or party order.
h. The Customs Act Appeal u/s. 130 (2)	130(2) (a)	180 Days.	From the date on which the order appealed against is received by commissioner of customs or the other party
7] REVIEW	Art. 124	30 Days.	The date of the decree or order.
8] CONTEMPT PETITION	Sec. 20	1 Year	From the date on which the contempt  ------- to have been committed.
9] CONTEMPT APPEAL	Sec. 19(4) (a)	30 Days.	-----
10] WRIT PETITIONS	Art. 226, 227 etc	No limitation but to be filed as early as possible.	------
11) REVISION PETITION in NCDRC	21 (b)	90	From the date of order in Appeal
12) REVIEW in NCDRC	22(2)	30	From the date of order or receipt of the order
13) Application for setting aside the ex-parte order or dismissal of complaint in default	22A	30	From the date of order or receipt of order

BMW hit-and-run exposé: Anand tenders unconditional apology to SC

NEW DELHI: Noted criminal lawyer R K Anand, who was held guilty of attempting to influence the course of justice in the infamous BMW hit-and-run case, has tendered an unconditional apology to the Supreme Court.
Anand tendered his "sincere and unqualified unconditional apology" for all acts imputed to him in the sting operation carried out by a news channel in 2007 and as observed in the Supreme Court judgement.

The reply by the advocate came on the apex court's show cause notice as to why he should not be given more punishment.

Anand pleaded before the court that his punishment should not be enhanced under section 12 of Contempt of Court Act.

The apex court had on July 29, 2009 upheld the conviction and stripping the status off senior advocate of Anand for contempt of court for attempting to influence the course of justice in the hit-and-run case.

A three-judge bench of apex court had asked as to why the quantum of punishment for Anand, who was the defence lawyer in the BMW case, should not be enhanced.

The apex court had held that the sting operation carried out by a news channel showing the defence and prosecution lawyers trying to influence controversial witness Kulkarni as not a typical case of trial by the media but undertaken in public interest.

The Delhi High Court had held guilty two senior advocates-- R K Anand and I U Khan, for obstructing administration of justice and, as a punishment, debarred them from appearing in courts for four months.

However, the apex court had set aside the conviction of Khan from charges of contempt of court.

SC slams India's tit-for-tat tactic on Pak prisoners

NEW DELHI: Holding that India lay great store in right to life, the Supreme Court on Monday ordered the government to immediately release 16 Pakistani prisoners who had completed their jail terms despite the Centre's argument that it was waiting for Islamabad to let off a similar number of Indian prisoners.

Commenting adversely on the UPA government's decision to put on hold the release of 16 Pakistanis even though they had completed their prison term in various state jails, a Bench comprising Justices Markandey Katju and R M Lodha said right to life had primacy in a country governed by rule of law and was not dependent on another country's action.

It refused to accept the Centre's stand that exchange of prisoners was a diplomatic process that required cooperation at both ends.

"Under the Constitution, detention even for a second beyond the permitted period of sentence is illegal. Now you (Centre) are putting a condition that until they return a similar number of prisoners we cannot send them back. If Pakistan does not do something right, does that mean we should also follow them," the Bench said.
A petition filed by J&K Panthers Party chief Bhim Singh and advocate B S Billowriya had alleged that over 30 Pakistanis were illegally detained in prisons in Agra, Jodhpur, Naini, Sangrur, Varanasi and Tihar despite completion of their sentences.

The 16 persons ordered to be released on Monday are Mohammad Ajmal, Mehrban Sathi, Mohammad Nawaz, Sajad Ali Jat, Shabir Ahmed, Shahzad Gul, Shahid Mehmood, Qudrat Ullah, Mohammad Farooq Raja, Dawood Ahmed Mughal, Faiz Ali, Mohammad Usman Shiksh, Zarar Baloch, Shahid Latief, Suhail Ahmed Kataria and Sher Khan. They have already been provided travel documents by Pakistan.

Petitioner Bhim Singh also requested the Bench to order expeditious completion of trial of the rest of the Pakistani prisoners even as the Centre informed the court that it had extended consular access to Pakistani high commission officials for establishing the identity of the prisoners.

It invited a strong rebuke from Justice Katju, who said, "It's easy to say complete trial within one year but you must understand our problem. In India there is great shortage of judges. We are performing under great pressure."

Switching to Hindi to drive home the point, Justice Katju said, "Koi jaadu ki chhadi hai hamare paas jo ek saal mein case sune (Do we have a magic wand to dispose of cases in a year)."
The Centre also informed the court that "a consular access programme was being finalised in consultation with the external affairs ministry and the Pakistani high commission to provide consular access to five Pakistani prisoners, including `security and high security' prisoners who have completed their sentence".

These five prisoners are Mohammad Abdullah aka Abu Murad, Mohammad Aslam Mughal aka Zahoor Ahmed, Manzoor Ahmad Sheikh aka Umer, Liaquat Ali Khan aka Mehboob Ali and Abdul Qadeer Khawaja.

India becoming hub of child prostitution: Supreme Court

India is "becoming a hub" for large-scale child prostitution rackets, the Supreme Court of India said today, and suggested the setting up of a special investigating agency to tackle the menace.

A bench of justices Dalveer Bhandari and AK Patnaik asked solicitor general Gopal Subramaniam to examine the idea of setting up a special investigating agency to combat child prostitution rackets, and assured that courts would deny bail to those who engage children in commercial sex.

"It's happening because of abject poverty in the country. This is also because of the very high and large-scale unemployment. All our cultural ethos are going down the drain. India is becoming a hub of such activities," the apex court said while dealing with a petition filed by an NGO, Bachapan Bachao Andolan.

The apex court also wanted to know why government is not invoking section 376 IPC (rape) against those exploiting the children in such prostitution rackets.

"Majority of sex workers are children. Why don't you register 376(IPC) against them? If you do it in 10 cases, they will fall like a pack of cards. Courts will also not
grant bail to them. Unfortunately, we are putting such sex workers to a lot of problem forcing them to face criminal prosecution," the apex court said.

SUPREME COURT ISSUES IMPORTANT DIRECTIONS REGARDING ROAD VICTIMS

Taking serious note of loopholes in the mechanism of payment of compensation to the victims of road accidents, the Supreme Court has issued directions to ensure prompt and adequate disbursement of compensation. Taking note of the plight of the victims of road accidents such as hit and run cases, the Supreme Court has directed the Director General of police of all the states and union territories to issue directions to all SHO to provide within 30 days the copies of FIR and the details of the victim l ike name, age and monthly income to the concerned accident tribunal within 30 days of the accident. This direction must be complied with latest by April 30. A bench comprising Mr Justice R V Raveendran, Mr Justice Mukundakam Sharma and  Mr Justice K S Radhakrishnan also directed that the details of medical report such as injury, post-mortem report be made available to the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (MACT) latest by  August 2010. The entire record should be sent to the concerned insurance company for processing and this direction should be complied with by all the states and the Union government latest by the end of this year. Suggestions made by the apex court include levy of road safety tax on all the vehicles sold and imposition of cess/surcharge on petrol and diesel to collect funds for payment of compensation  to the victims of such accidents. Third party insurance premium which will cover all  gratuitous passengers travelling in goods vehicles and private vehicles should be collected  by central insurance agencies. The court has also suggested immediate payment of compensation to the accident  victims including hit and run cases.The apex court has also suggested that safe cess amount  and third party insurance premium amount collected by the government should be utilised  for such payments. The amount of compensation in hit and run cases should be increased as  these accidents constitute 20 percent of the total mishap in the country.  Justice Raveendran, writing the 25 page judgement for the bench, also suggested that owner  of the vehicle involved in the accident should be directed to deposit an adequate amount as pre-condition  for release of the vehicle. The apex court has suggested to the government to make suitable amendments to the II-schedule of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and also to section 158 (6) of the Act at the earliest. The court also took note of the fact that road accidents in India were highest in the world and the delay in paying compensation the longest.

Court restrains BPSC from publishing PT results

News Desk - December 24, 2009

PATNA — The Patna High Court has restrained the Bihar Public Service Commission (BPSC) from publishing the results of Judicial Service Competition Preliminary Test (PT).
The court said that the Commission can conduct the examination according to preset program (December 30) but only after getting permission from the court it can publish the result.
A division bench of Chief Justice Deepak Misra and Justice Shivkirti Singh on Wednesday delivered the judgment after hearing on a petition filed by Dayanand Singh. The applicant through his lawyer Chakrapani challenged the Bihar government’s decision to extend the benefits of reservation in the judicial services to Other Backward Castes (OBCs).
In June this year, the Nitish Kumar government had extended reservation benefits to the backward castes in state judicial services conducted by the BPSC. As per the state government’s decision there will be 49.5% (BC- 27%, SC/ST – 22.5%) reservation in junior and special category posts in the judicial services.
The petitioner argued that a similar attempt was turned down by the Supreme Court which asked the then state government to prepare a detailed guideline and submit the same to the Patna High Court which too rejected the government’s proposals.
The matter will come up for final hearing on January 19. The court has also directed the state government to file counter-affidavit before January 15.
(With inputs from Agencies)

SC shifts 7 cases against Raj Thackeray to a Delhi court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday transferred to a Delhi court seven cases registered against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) chief Raj Thackeray in Bihar and Jharkhand for his alleged hate speeches against north Indians.

Cases against Thackeray were registered for his alleged inflammatory speeches from January 2008.

A bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and B S Chauhan decided to transfer all proceedings relating to those cases to a Tis Hazari court after the counsel of all the parties consented to it. 

Out of the seven cases, five were registered in Jharkhand and two in Bihar by different individuals.

Thackeray had sought transfer of all the cases to one place.

PTI 

Delhi HC issues notice to N D Tiwari on paternity suit

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice to veteran politician and former Andhra Pradesh Governor N D Tiwari on a paternity suit 

Twitter Facebook Share Email Print Save Comment

filed by a youth claiming to be his biological son.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice A P Shah asked Tiwari to give his response by February 9 on the suit filed by Rohit Shekhar, 30, seeking its direction to declare Tiwari is his biological father. 

Shekhar filed an appeal before a Division Bench challenging a single-bench order which had dismissed his petition on the ground that it was not maintainable.

Justice S N Dhingra had on November 3 last said the suit filed by Shekhar is not maintainable and allowed the plea of 84-year-old Tiwari who had sought dismissal of the petition.

The Court had said that it did not have the territorial jurisdiction to hear the case as Tiwari, then Andhra Pradesh Governor, was in Hyderabad and a suit against him could be filed only in that city.

The appeal comes within days of Tiwari resigning as Governor in the wake of a sex scandal with a news channel purportedly showing him in a compromising position with three women. Tiwari has dismissed the allegation as "baseless".

A law graduate, Shekhar, 30, filed the suit claiming he was born out of an intimate relationship between his mother Ujjwala Sharma and Tiwari, a charge denied by the latter. 

Tiwari was earlier directed by the court in November 2008 to file his reply in which he had refuted all the allegations and submitted that the suit was filed to malign him.

Can we legalize prostitution?, Supreme Court

The honourable Supreme Court of the country in a striking remark while hearing a public interest litigation yesterday (Wednesday) had asked the Government of India whether it is possible to legalize world’s oldest profession prostitution, if the profession considered as shameless is feasibly beyond control.  
   
A bench comprising Justice Dalveer Bhandari and AK Patnaik gave above mentioned dramatics remarks when they were hearing a public interest litigation lodged by country’s leading N.G.O Bachpan Bachao Aandolan and a similar PIL lodged by Childline, the PIL had brought a sensitive cause in front of the honourable court . In its application the NGOs have raised the issue of massive child trafficking and its implications on socio-economic development of the children and in turn society and country as a whole. 

The bench vigilantly heard arguments from both the party and opined “They (sex trade) have been operating in one way or the other and nowhere in the world have they been able to curb it by legislation. In some cases, they are carried out in a sophisticated manner. So why don't you legalise it?" Appearing for the government Solicitor General expressed that he will thoroughly work on the issue and discuss it with the various government agencies, before filling government’s opinion and reply on the controversial issue.     

The bench also touched various other issues liable for child trafficking and prostitution, it was of the opinion that poverty is one of the significant causes that forces people into this trade, children are trafficked from poverty ridden areas and most of them end up becoming bonded labour and prostitutes. The bench also vehemently rapped the government for failing to check poverty, the two justices said "We are talking about growing GDP. I do not know what is the development we are all talking about when the number of BPL families is at 37 per cent which has increased from 30 per cent. Growth of GDP does not mean some four or five families have developed. If this is the state of development, we can't help it."

Given the manner in which this derogatory trade prostitution is carried out across the country, government should legalize it, as penalizing people have not helped in curbing sex trade in any part of the country. Reasons are obvious, urge for sex is natural, migrant workers and others willing to have sex often visit prostitutes and call girls, that’s why the trade is flourishing but declining. Legalizing it will also help in designing comprehensive strategy to combat AIDS/HIV and proper rehabilitation of people engaged in the trade.

 

Apart from red light area (known prostitution area) the trade is also carried out in camouflage manner, fake massage and escort service centres in metro cities carry out it in a very planned and sophisticated style, they run their business like corporate companies.     

Now the next hearing of the issue will take place on January 5, then only we will know whether government favours legalising prostitution or not.