FAIRGROWTH INVESTMENTS LTD. versus THE CUSTODIAN

FAIRGROWTH INVESTMENTS LTD. versus THE CUSTODIAN

The provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, including Section 5, do not apply to petitions under Section 4(2) of the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992. Delay in filing such petitions cannot be condoned by the Special Court.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Fairgrowth Investments Ltd.; Respondent: The Custodian
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Special Court Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation, Condonation of Delay, Special Courts, Statutory Interpretation
Financial Regulation Civil Procedure Limitation Condonation of Delay Special Courts Statutory Interpretation

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fairgrowth Investments Ltd.

Appellant

The Custodian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Special Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Special Court has power to condone delay in filing a petition under Section 4(2) of the Special Courts Act
  2. 2 Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 can be invoked for condoning such delay under Section 4(2)
  3. 3 Whether Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act makes Section 5 applicable unless excluded

Ratio Decidendi

The provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, including Section 5, do not apply to petitions under Section 4(2) of the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992. Delay in filing such petitions cannot be condoned by the Special Court.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Petition of objection filed under Section 4(2) was rightly rejected as time-barred by the Special Court.
  • No order as to costs.