Holding

The Court restored the 23 March 2020 order, extended the exclusion of the limitation period to 2 October 2021, provided a minimum 90‑day filing window from 3 October 2021 (or the longer actual balance), and applied the exclusion to the specified statutes while directing amendment of containment‑zone guidelines.

Summary

The Supreme Court, acting suo motu, extended the limitation period for all judicial and quasi‑judicial proceedings due to the COVID‑19 pandemic, initially ordering an exclusion of the period from 15 March 2020 to 14 March 2021. After a decline in cases, the Court on 8 March 2021 limited the exclusion to that one‑year span, providing a 90‑day minimum filing window from 15 March 2021 for matters whose limitation would have expired during the excluded period. The Supreme Court Advocates‑on‑Record Association (SCAORA) sought restoration of the earlier 23 March 2020 order, arguing that the pandemic’s resurgence warranted a longer exclusion. The Court restored the 23 March 2020 order, extended the excluded period to 2 October 2021, and stipulated that the balance of limitation as of 15 March 2020 would become available from 3 October 2021, with a minimum 90‑day period (or the longer actual balance) for cases whose limitation expired during the excluded interval. The exclusion was also made applicable to specific statutes – the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – and the Government was directed to amend containment‑zone guidelines to allow regulated movement for time‑bound legal applications. The miscellaneous application (MA No. 665 of 2021) was consequently disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the order dated 23 March 2020 extending limitation periods should be restored and continued despite the later order of 8 March 2021.
What period should be excluded for computing limitation in all proceedings in view of the second COVID‑19 wave.
Whether a uniform 90‑day filing period should apply to cases whose limitation expired during the excluded period.
Whether the conditions of the 8 March 2021 order need modification in light of the pandemic’s resurgence.
Whether the exclusion of the period should be extended to specific statutes such as the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Commercial Courts Act and the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Legislation cited

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996s. 23(4), s. 29A
Commercial Courts Act, 2015s. 12A
Limitation Act, 1963
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881s. 138(b), s. 138(c)

Subjects

limitation periodCOVID‑19 pandemicextension of limitationSupreme CourtSuo Motu jurisdictionArbitration and Conciliation ActCommercial Courts ActNegotiable Instruments Actcontainment zonesArticle 32Article 141Article 142

Judgment

[2021] 7 S.C.R. 1099 1099

IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION A
Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021
in
(SMW (C) No. 3 of 2020)
SEPTEMBER 23,2021 B
[N. V. RAMANA, CJI, L. NAGESWARA RAO AND
SURYA KANT, JJ.]
Covid-19 Pandemic – Limitation, extension of – On
23.03.2020, this Court had directed extension of the period of
C
limitation in all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals including
this Court w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders – On 08.03.2021,
since there was reduction in prevalence of Covid-19 virus, an order
was passed that in computing the period of limitation for any suit,
appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till
14.03.2021 would be excluded – Thereafter, there was a second D
surge in COVID-19 cases which had a devastating and debilitating
effect – MA no.665 of 2021 was filed by Advocates on Record
Association seeking restoration of Order dated 23.03.2020 – Order
dated 23.03.2020 was restored and in continuation of the order
dated 08.03.2021, with directions that the period(s) of limitation,
E
as prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all
judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not,
shall stand extended till further orders – There is consensus that
there is no requirement for continuance of the initial order passed
by this Court on 23.03.2020 and relaxation of the period of
limitation need not be continued any further, therefore, MA no.665 F
of 2021 is disposed of with following directions: In computing the
period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding,
the period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall stand excluded –
Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on
15.03.2020, if any, shall become available with effect from
G
03.10.2021 – In cases where the limitation would have expired
during the period between 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021,
notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining,
all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 03.10.2021
– In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining,
with effect from 03.10.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer H
1099
1100 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 7 S.C.R.

A period shall apply – The period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021
shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under
ss.23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
s.12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c)
of s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other
laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting
B
proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can
condone delay) and termination of proceedings – The Government
of India shall amend the guidelines for containment zones, to state
– “Regulated movement will be allowed for medical emergencies,
provision of essential goods and services, and other necessary
C functions, such as, time bound applications, including for legal
purposes, and educational and job-related requirements.”
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Miscellaneous Application
No. 665 of 2021 in SMW (C) No. 03 of 2020.
(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)
D
K. K. Venugopal, AG, S. Niranjan Reddy, P. H. Parekh, Soumya
Chakraborty, Vikas Singh, Sr. Advs., B. V. Balaram Das, Shivaji M.
Jadhav, Manoj K. Mishra, Dr. Joseph S. Aristotle, Ms. Diksha Rai, Nikhil
Jain, Atulesh Kumar, Dr. Aman Hingorani, Ms. Anzu Varkey, Sachin
Sharma, Aljo Joseph, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Abhinav Ramkrishna,
E Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, Polanki Gowtham, Shaik Mohamad Haneef, T.
Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Amitabh Sinha, K. V. Girish Chowdary, Sameer
Parekh, Kshatrashal Raj, Ms. Tanya Chaudhry, Ms. Pratyusha
Priyadarshini, Ms. Nitika Pandey, Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Ms. Shashi
Pathak, Amit Sharma, Dipesh Sinha, Ms. Pallavi Barua, Prateek Kumar,
F Ashok Nijhawan, Aman Bhalla, Ms. Anindita Mitra, Pawan Reley, Akshay
Lodhi, Vinod Sharma, Joydip Roy, Sajal Awasthi, Binod Kumar Singh,
Parijat Som, Yashvardhan, Apoorv Shukla, Ms. Smita Kant, Ms. Ishita
Farsaiya, Ms. Prabhleen Kaur, Ms. Kritika Nagpal, Ms. Bhavya Bhatia,
Arjun Garg, Aakash Nandolia, Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Ms. Sunieta Ojha,
P. I. Jose, Prashant K. Sharma, Jenis V. Francis, Avijit Mani Tripathi,
G T. K. Nayak, Sahil Tagotra, A. P. Mayee, M/s VKC Law Offices,
Mukesh K. Giri, Kunal Chatterji, Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Abhimanyu
Tewari, Ms. Eliza Bar, Apoorv Kurup, Ms. Nidhi Mittal, Ms. Binu Tamta,
Dhruv Tamta, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Divyakant Lahoti, Parikshit Ahuja,
Ms. Praveena Bisht, Ms. Madhur Jhavar, Ms. Vindhya Mehra, Kartik
H Lahoti, Rahul Maheshwari, Ms. Shivangi Malhotra, Tapesh Kumar Singh,
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION 1101

Aditya Pratap Singh, Mrs. L. Bhaswati Singh, Aditya Narayan Das, A
Ms. Uttara Babbar, Manan Bansal, Advs. for the appearing parties.
The following Order of the Court was passed :
ORDER
1. Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in March, 2020, B
this Court took Suo Motu cognizance of the difficulties that might be
faced by the litigants in filing petitions/ applications/ suits/ appeals/ all
other proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed under the
general law of limitation or under any special laws (both Central and/or
State). On 23.03.2020, this Court directed extension of the period of
limitation in all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals including this C
Court w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders.
2. Considering the reduction in prevalence of COVID-19 virus
and normalcy being restored, the following order was passed in the Suo
Motu proceedings on 08.03.2021:
D
“1. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal,
application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till
14.03.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance
period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall
become available with effect from 15.03.2021.
E
2. In cases where the limitation would have expired during
the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021,
notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation
remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90
days from 15.03.2021. In the event the actual balance period
of limitation remaining, with effect from 15.03.2021, is greater F
than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
3. The period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall also stand
excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections
23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos G
(b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of
limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which
the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of
proceedings.
H
1102 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 7 S.C.R.

A 4. The Government of India shall amend the guidelines for
containment zones, to state.
“Regulated movement will be allowed for medical
emergencies, provision of essential goods and services, and
other necessary functions, such as, time bound applications,
B including for legal purposes, and educational and job-related
requirements.”
3. Thereafter, there was a second surge in COVID-19 cases which
had a devastating and debilitating effect. The Supreme Court Advocates
on Record Association (SCAORA) intervened in the Suo Motu
C proceedings by filing Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 seeking
restoration of the order dated 23.03.2020. Acceding to the request made
by SCAORA, this Court passed the following order on 27.04.2021:
“We also take judicial notice of the fact that the steep
rise in COVID-19 Virus cases is not limited to Delhi alone but
D it has engulfed the entire nation. The extraordinary situation
caused by the sudden and second outburst of COVID-19 Virus,
thus, requires extraordinary measures to minimize the hardship
of litigant–public in all the states. We, therefore, restore the
order dated 23rd March, 2020 and in continuation of the
order dated 8th March, 2021 direct that the period(s) of
E limitation, as prescribed under any general or special laws
in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings,
whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till further
orders.
It is further clarified that the period from 14th March,
F 2021 till further orders shall also stand excluded in computing
the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any
G other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for
instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court
or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of
proceedings.
We have passed this order in exercise of our powers
under Article 142 read with Article 141 of the Constitution of
H
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION 1103

India. Hence it shall be a binding order within the meaning A
of Article 141 on all Courts/Tribunals and Authorities.”
4. In spite of all the uncertainties about another wave of the deadly
COVID-19 virus, it is imminent that the order dated 08.03.2021 is restored
as the situation is near normal.
5. We have heard learned Attorney General for India, Mr. Vikas B
Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the Election Commission of India,
Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, learned counsel for the SCAORA and other
learned Advocates. There is consensus that there is no requirement for
continuance of the initial order passed by this Court on 23.03.2020 and
relaxation of the period of limitation need not be continued any further. C
The contention of Mr. Vikas Singh is that the order dated 08.03.2021
can be restored, subject to a modification. He submitted that paragraph
No.2 of the order dated 08.03.2021 provides that the limitation period of
90 days will start from 15.03.2021 notwithstanding the actual balance of
period of limitation in cases where limitation has expired between
15.03.2020 and 14.03.2021. According to him, the period of limitation D
prior to 15.03.2020 has to be taken into account and only the balance
period of limitation should be made available for the purpose of filing
cases.
6. The order dated 23.03.2020 was passed in view of the
extraordinary health crisis. On 08.03.2021, the order dated 23.03.2020 E
was brought to an end, permitting the relaxation of period of limitation
between 15.03.2020 and 14.03.2021. While doing so, it was made clear
that the period of limitation would start from 15.03.2021. As the said
order dated 08.03.2021 was only a one-time measure, in view of the
pandemic, we are not inclined to modify the conditions contained in the F
order dated 08.03.2021.
7. The learned Attorney General for India stated that paragraph
No.4 of the order dated 08.03.2021 should be continued as there are
certain containment zones in some States even today.
8. Therefore, we dispose of the M.A. No.665 of 2021 with the G
following directions: -
I. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal,
application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till
02.10.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance
H
1104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2021] 7 S.C.R.

A period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall
become available with effect from 03.10.2021.
II. In cases where the limitation would have expired during
the period between 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021,
notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation
B remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90
days from 03.10.2021. In the event the actual balance period
of limitation remaining, with effect from 03.10.2021, is
greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.
III. The period from 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021 shall also stand
C excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections
23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and
provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe
period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits
D (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and
termination of proceedings.
IV. The Government of India shall amend the guidelines for
containment zones, to state.

E “Regulated movement will be allowed for medical emergencies,
provision of essential goods and services, and other necessary
functions, such as, time bound applications, including for legal
purposes, and educational and job-related requirements.”

F Devika Gujral Miscellaneous Application disposed of.

G

H