Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Under Section 12, Limitation Act, 1963 in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be . . . . . . . . .

Under Section 12, Limitation Act, 1963 in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be . . . . . . . . . Correct Answer Excluded

Related Questions

Assertion (A): Where any special or local law prescribes for any suit appeal or application a period of limitation different from period prescribed by the Schedule, the provisions of Section 3 of Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply as if such period were the period prescribed by the schedule.
Reason (R): Where a Special Law prescribes a period of limitation for filing appeal but there is no provision therefore under Limitation Act, 1963, the period of limitation provided under the Special Law must be treated to be different from that under the Limitation Act.
Statement A - In computing period of limitation for any appeal, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be included.
Statement B - In computing period of limitation for any appeal, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining the copy of the decree shall be excluded.
Statement A: In computing period of limitation for any appeal, the day from which such period is to be reckoned, shall be included.
Statement B: In computing period of Limitation for any appeal, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining the copy of the decree shall be excluded.
To constitute a matter of res judicata which of the following conditions must concur?
1. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit or issue must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue either actually (section 11, explanation III) or constructively (section 11, explanation IV) in the former suit
2. The former suit must have been a suit between the same parties under whom they or any of them claim. Explanation VI of Section 11 must be read with this condition
3. The parties as aforesaid must have litigated under the same title in the former suit
4. The court which decided the former suit must have been a court competent to try the subsequent suit of the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised. Explanation II of section 11 is to be read with condition
5. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must have been heard and finally decided by the court in the first suit. Explanation V of section 11 is to be read with this condition
Under Limitation Act, 1963, in computing the period of limitation for any suit, the day from which such period is to be reckoned
Which section of the Limitation Act prescribes that in computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application, for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded:
Which section of the Limitation Act prescribes that in computing the period of limitation any suit, appeal or application, for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised reviewed shall be excluded:
In computing the period of limitation for any suit the time during which the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceedings, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the defendant shall be excluded where the proceeding relates to the same matter in issue and is prosecuted in good faith in a court which from the defect of jurisdiction is unable to entertain it. Exclusion of such period has been laid down in section . . . . . . . . . of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Assertion (A): Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 empowers the Court to admit a suit after the prescribed period if the plaintiff satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not instituting the suit.
Reason (R): Even an appeal may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant shows sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the prescribed period.
In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the objection of non-impleadment of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit, under section 14 of Limitation Act is