Facts

In Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020, by order dated 23.03.2020 and 06.05.2020, the Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered that period of limitation prescribed under all the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, shall be extended w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders. The Ld. Attorney General  had sought a minor modification in the aforesaid orders. Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not prescribe a period of limitation   but fixes a time to do certain acts, i.e. making an arbitral award within a prescribed time. Similarly, Section 23(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for a time period of 6 months for the completion of the statement of claim and defence. Under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts  Act,2015, time is prescribed for completing the process of compulsory pre- litigation, mediation and settlement. Service of notices, summons and exchange of pleadings/documents, is a requirement of virtually every legal proceeding. Service of notices, summons and pleadings etc. have not been possible during the period   of lockdown because this involves visits to post offices, courier companies orphysical delivery of notices, summons and pleadings. There was also a prayer to extend the period of validity of cheques.

Issue

Parties had approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court for extending the time where limitation was to expire during the period when there was a lockdown in view      of COVID-19 or the time to perform a particular act was to expire during the lockdown.

Held

Orders in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020, by order dated 23.03.2020 and 06.05.2020 would also apply for extension of the time limit prescribed under Section 23(4) of the said Act. Time limit under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, was liable to be extended. Therefore, the Hon’ble Court directed that the said time shall stand extended from the time when the lockdown is lifted plus 45 days thereafter. It was also directed that Service of notices, summons and pleadings etc. may be effected by e-mail, FAX, commonly used instant messaging services, such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal etc. However, if a party intends to effect service by means of said instant messaging services, it was directed that       in addition thereto, the party must also effect service of the same document/ documents by e-mail, simultaneously on the same date.

Regarding extension of period of validity of cheques, the Hon’ble Court found  that the said period has not been prescribed by any Statute but it is a period prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 35-A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The Hon’ble Court did not consider it appropriate to interfere with the period prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India, particularly,  since the entire banking system functions on the basis of the period so prescribed.     It therefore held that the Reserve Bank of India may in its discretion, alter such period as it thinks fit. (C) No. 3/2020, dated 10-07-2020).

Editorial: This order is modification of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court In re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation 2020 SCC OnLine SC 434.

The order of the honourable Court would alleviate hardships faced by people in completing such formalities during the pandemic as courier/postal services have been severely affected. The decision is  one of its kind and shall be  available   in cases limited to the period of pandemic and such other cases where it is established that the physical service is  not  possible. It  also has  the  potential,  on being legalized, of becoming the standard practice in normal times with the increasing uptake of information technology.

“Measures must always  in  a  progressive society be held superior to men, who are after all imperfect instruments, working for their fulfilment.”

– Mahatma Gandhi