Limitation actResidual periodSupreme Court of India

Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v Telecom District Manager

(2002) 5 Supreme Court Cases 44820021 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
A suit was filed and the applicable limitation period was disputed. One party argued Article 113 (3-year residual) applied. The other party contended a specific article in the Schedule covered the suit.
Issue
When does Article 113 (residual period) apply, and when is it excluded?
Held
Article 113 is a residual provision: it applies only when no other article covers the suit.
Principle
Article 113 (residual 3-year period) of the Limitation Act applies only when no other article in the Schedule covers the suit. Where a specific article covers the subject matter, Article 113 is excluded.
Cite this

Facts

  • A suit was filed and the applicable limitation period was disputed
  • One party argued Article 113 (3-year residual) applied
  • The other party contended a specific article in the Schedule covered the suit

Issue

  1. When does Article 113 (residual period) apply, and when is it excluded?

Held

  • Article 113 is a residual provision: it applies only when no other article covers the suit
  • Where a specific article in the Schedule applies to the subject matter, Article 113 is excluded
  • The court must first examine whether any specific article covers the case before defaulting to Article 113
  • Article 113 is the last resort, not the first choice

Ratio decidendi

Article 113 is residual: it applies only when no specific article covers the suit. Specific articles exclude Article 113 automatically.

Exam use

How to use it in an answer

- Key line: "In Videsh Sanchar Nigam (2002), the Supreme Court held that Article 113 (residual 3 years) applies only when no other article covers the suit. Specific articles exclude it."

Cite this

Citation

Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Telecom District Manager (2002) 5 Supreme Court Cases 448

Reported: (2002) 5 SCC 448; verified via standard references. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.