The Himachal Pradesh High Court has clarified that the Supreme Court’s directive to exclude the pandemic period from limitation computation applies only when the limitation period would have expired between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022. In this case, the execution petition was filed after the statutory 12-year period, and the exclusion was held inapplicable since the limitation had not yet lapsed during the pandemic window.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioners, landowners whose property was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, sought execution of an award dated 03.10.2012 passed by the Reference Court. The award granted compensation, and under Article 136 of the Limitation Act, the period to execute such an award is 12 years from the date of the award. The petitioners filed the execution petition on 17.01.2025, which was dismissed by the District Judge, Kullu, on the ground that it was time-barred.
Key Facts
- The award was passed on 03.10.2012
- The 12-year limitation period to execute the award would have expired on 02.10.2024
- The execution petition was filed on 17.01.2025, 107 days after the expiry of limitation
- The petitioners applied for a certified copy of the award on 07.12.2024, which was delivered on 12.12.2024
- The petitioners contended that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 should be excluded under the Supreme Court’s order in In Re: Disruption of Limitation Period Due to COVID-19
- The District Judge held that the exclusion was not applicable because the limitation had not expired during the pandemic period
Procedural History
- 03.10.2012: Reference Court passed the award
- 02.10.2024: Deadline for filing execution petition under Article 136
- 07.12.2024: Petitioners applied for certified copy of award
- 12.12.2024: Certified copy delivered
- 17.01.2025: Execution petition filed
- 09.12.2025: District Judge, Kullu, dismissed execution petition as time-barred
- 17.01.2026: Revision petition filed before Himachal Pradesh High Court
- 08.04.2026: High Court dismissed revision petition
Relief Sought
The petitioners sought setting aside of the District Judge’s order dated 09.12.2025 and restoration of the execution petition, arguing that the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 should be excluded under the Supreme Court’s order.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 could be excluded from the limitation period under the Supreme Court’s order when the limitation had not expired during that period, and the execution petition was filed after the statutory 12-year term.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
Counsel argued that the Supreme Court’s order in In Re: Disruption of Limitation Period Due to COVID-19 mandated exclusion of the entire pandemic period (15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022) from limitation computation, regardless of whether the limitation had expired during that window. He contended that the exclusion was intended to provide relief to all litigants affected by court closures and that the District Judge erred in applying a restrictive interpretation.
For the Respondent
The Additional Advocate General submitted that the Supreme Court’s order was conditional: exclusion applied only if the limitation period was due to expire during the pandemic window. The order explicitly provided that if the limitation had not expired by 28.02.2022, the original period continued to run, and petitioners were granted a minimum 90-day window from 01.03.2022 only if the remaining period was less than 90 days. The petitioners’ limitation had already expired on 02.10.2024, making the exclusion inapplicable.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the Supreme Court’s order dated 24.03.2020 and its subsequent clarifications, particularly the directive that the excluded period applies only where the limitation would have expired between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022. The Court emphasized that the order was not a blanket extension but a targeted relief mechanism.
"The Hon’ble Supreme Court... directed to exclude the period w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, only where the limitation had to expire during the said period, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation."
The Court noted that the petitioners’ limitation expired on 02.10.2024, well after the pandemic window. Therefore, the exclusion could not be invoked. The Court further observed that the petitioners delayed seeking the certified copy until December 2024, nearly 14 months after the limitation had expired, which further undermined their claim of diligence.
The District Judge’s conclusion that the petition was barred by limitation was found to be legally sound and free from error. The Court held that the revision petition lacked merit and could not be entertained under its revisional jurisdiction.
The Verdict
The petitioners’ revision petition was dismissed. The High Court upheld the District Judge’s order dated 09.12.2025, confirming that the execution petition filed on 17.01.2025 was barred by limitation under Article 136 of the Limitation Act. No costs were awarded. The Court clarified that the pandemic-related exclusion under the Supreme Court’s order does not apply where the limitation period had not expired between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Exclusion of Pandemic Period Is Conditional
- Practitioners must calculate the original limitation period first
- The pandemic exclusion applies only if the limitation would have expired between 15.03.2020 and 28.02.2022
- If the limitation expired after 28.02.2022, the full original period applies without exclusion
Delay in Seeking Certified Copies Is Fatal
- The 90-day window from 01.03.2022 applies only if the remaining limitation is less than 90 days
- Delay in obtaining certified copies after limitation expiry cannot be cured by invoking pandemic relief
- Courts will scrutinize diligence in procedural steps, especially when limitation is near expiry
Execution Petitions Require Precise Timing
- Land acquisition awards under Article 136 have a strict 12-year limitation
- Any delay beyond the expiry date, even by days, renders the petition time-barred
- Legal notices or internal deliberations do not extend limitation; only statutory or judicial orders can
