Condonation of Delay Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963: Critical Analysis

6 Pages Posted: 16 Apr 2018

See all articles by Surabhi Sharma

Surabhi Sharma

University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (UPES), Students

Date Written: April 13, 2018


Condonation of Delay is the extension of the prescribed period in certain cases; the particular delay has been defined in Section 5. It preferred appeal and application and does not include suit as it is an exception to Bar of Limitation which is defined under the Act. The Doctrine of Condonation of delay doesn’t apply to execution proceedings as it deals with the Criminal Cases. For taking the benefit of the Doctrine the applicant must have the sufficient cause in order to condone the delay, certain instances have been mentioned below in details. It is the discretion of the Court even after the sufficient cause given by the applicant, instances in which condone is delay has been given under the project. The Doctrine is applicable only to the Criminal Proceedings because it does not prohibit other Sections. The rationale behind why the Doctrine does not include suit has been defined below. While making application certain conflicts are to be mentioned by the Court under the Act.

Statement of Problem:

The statement of a problem under the Doctrine of Condonation of Delay is an exception to general rule that is Bar of Limitation under the Act, and it does not include ‘Suit’. The Court Condon the delay only when an applicant has sufficient cause for not preferring appeal and application. The rationale behind this has been discussed. The expression ‘sufficient cause’ cannot be defined because it is very wide and liberal in nature.

Survey of existing literature:

The Doctrine has been brought under the Act, as we know that the main aim of Court is to provide justice and if the Suit is time-barred then no subsequent suit can be filed but the exception for time-barred is under the Condonation of delay, an applicant has sufficient cause then the Court may condone the delay.

Identification of issues:

1. Whether and what is the rationale behind the Doctrine the Condonation of delay?

2. Whether and Why the Doctrine does not include ‘Suit’?

3. Whether and what is the expression ‘sufficient cause’?

Objective and Scope of Research: The aim towards the research is in which circumstances the Court may delay the Condone, in which cases the plea of the Doctrine can be taken. The applicant must have sufficient cause in order to claim the Condonation of Delay.

Research Methodology adopted:

The research methodology adopted in the Project is based on Secondary Sources: Civil Procedure Code by C.K Takwani.


• Meaning

• The reason behind not including the Suit.

• General Principles for the Condonation of Delay.

• The expression Sufficient cause.

• Instances where the delay is condoned and not condoned by the Court.

• Case discussed.

Keywords: Bar of Limitation, Condonation of Delay, Discretion of Court, Execution Proceedings, Sufficient Cause.

Suggested Citation

Sharma, Surabhi, Condonation of Delay Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963: Critical Analysis (April 13, 2018). Available at SSRN: or

Surabhi Sharma (Contact Author)

University of Petroleum and Energy Studies (UPES), Students ( email )


Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics