Report No. 38
143. Location of the new Articles 11A and 11B.-
About the placing of the new articles, the following comment had been made6 on our draft Report:-
"It appears to this Government that since the proposed Articles relate to a specific category of cases, namely, suits against the Central Government for loss of or injury to or non-delivery of articles sent by post, the difficulty may easily be solved by placing them under a separate and appropriate heading.".
In our view, no such change is needed.
1. Para. 141, supra.
2. Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963).
3. As to the expression "Central Government", see section 79, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and Article 112, Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963).
4. See rulings under old Articles 30 and 31; particularly G.I.P. Rly Co. v. Rasett Chandnull, 1895 ILR 19 Born 185 (186-188) (Bayley C.J & Farran J.).
5. See also the 1899 Amendment as construed in Jaldu Venkatasubba Rao v. Asiatic Steam Navigation Co., 1914 ILR 39 Mad 1 (10, 11, 12) (FB) and in Chiranji Lal v. B.N. Rly., ILR 52 Cal 372: AIR 1925 Cal 559 (560).
6. S. No. 170 (A State Government).
144. We give below a chart showing the new articles (i.e., in the Limitation Act, 1%3) corresponding to articles of the 1908 Act, relevant to the subject.
Articles in the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 |
Articles in the Limitation Act, 1963 |
| 30 | 10 (period increased from 1 year to 3 years). |
| 31 | 11 (period increased from 1 year to 3 years). |
| 48 | 91 (also 68). |
| 49 | 91 (also 69). |
| 65 | 27. |
| 115 | 55. |
| 120 | 113 (period reduced from 6 to 3 years). |
Back
