The Supreme Court has upheld a Madras High Court order which ruled that the top court’s suo motu order of March 2020 extending limitation period to file cases will apply not only to the ‘period of limitation’ but also to ‘period upto which delay can be condoned in exercise of discretion conferred by the statute’ [Centaur Pharmaceuticals v. La Renon Healthcare and Stanford Laboratories].
A Bench of Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna dismissed an appeal filed against the Madras High Court verdict while also holding that subsequent orders of the Supreme Court in the same suo motu case have clearly held that the period of limitation which could have been extended and/or condoned is also excluded up to October 2021.
The order was passed on a plea which was filed by Centaur Pharmaceuticals (plaintiff in a patent infringement suit in Madras High Court) against La Renon Healthcare and Stanford Laboratories (defendant) challenging an order of the Madras High Court in which the written statements filed by the Defendants were taken on record and their applications for condonation of delay were allowed.
By way of background, the defendant was served summons on January 10 and January 23, 2020 respectively. The 30-day period for filing of written statements under Order VIII Rule 1 CPC read with Commercial Courts Act, 2015 expired on February 9, and February 22, 2020 i.e. prior to the suspension of limitation on March 15, 2020 by the Supreme Court’s suo moto order dated March 23, 2020.
However, the 120-day period during which delay can be condoned under Order VIII Rule 1 of CPC expired on May 9, 2020 and May 22, 2020 respectively. Written Statements were filed in July, 2020.
The plaintiff opposed the defendant’s applications for condonation by placing reliance on the 3 judge bench decision of the Supreme Court dated September 18, 2020 in Sagufa Ahmed v Upper Assam Plywood Products Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. in which the Supreme Court held that the order dated March 23, 2020 extends only the ‘period of limitation’ and not the ‘period upto which delay can be condoned in exercise of discretion conferred by the statute’. It was their argument that since 30 days expired prior to March 15, 2020, the benefit of the suo moto order would not apply to the defendant.
This argument of the plaintiff was rejected by the Madras High Court by an order April 20, 2021 which proceeded to allow the applications for condonation. The Madras High Court found favour with the defendants’ arguments that the subsequent orders of the Supreme Court dated March 8, 2021 and April 27, 2021 in the same suo motu case clarified that the period from March 15, 2020 onwards is also to be excluded for the purpose of computing “outer limits (i.e. the period during which delay can be condoned)”.
This order came to be challenged before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that the Madras High Court order has correctly decided the plea.
“We are of the opinion that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court has not committed any error in extending the period of limitation in filing the written statement and consequently taking on record the written statement filed on behalf of the respondent-original defendant,” the top court said.
Even as held by this Court in the subsequent orders even the period of limitation which could have been extended and/or condoned by the Tribunal/Court is excluded and/or extended even up to October 7, 2021, the apex court added.
Source from: https://www.barandbench.com/news/covid-19-limitation-extension-applies-period-delay-can-be-condoned-supreme-court