Text of the Limitation Act 1963 Section 22: Continuing Breaches and Torts
In the case of a continuing breach of contract or in the case of a continuing tort, a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment of the time during which the breach or the tort, as the case may be, continues.
Explanation Limitation Act 1963 Section 22
Section 22 of the Limitation Act 1963 is straightforward: if a wrong—like a breach of contract or a tort (a civil harm, such as trespass)—keeps happening over time, the clock for filing a lawsuit resets every moment the issue continues.
Imagine someone’s fence keeps blocking your path daily—that’s a continuing tort, and you get a new chance to sue as long as it’s there. The same goes for a contract being repeatedly ignored, like unpaid rent month after month.
Each day the problem persists starts a fresh limitation period, making it easier to take legal action without being barred by a single deadline. It’s designed to handle ongoing wrongs fairly.
Key Points Limitation Act 1963 Section 22
- Applies to continuing breaches of contract or torts.
- Fresh limitation period starts every moment the breach/tort continues.
- Limitation clock doesn’t stop until the wrong ends.
- Based on the Act’s Schedule (e.g., 3 years for most torts/contracts).
- Ensures ongoing issues remain actionable.
Examples Limitation Act 1963 Section 22
- Neighbor’s wall blocks your path since 2023, still up in 2025—3-year limit restarts daily, sue anytime before it’s removed.
- Tenant skips rent monthly from 2022—3-year limit for breach restarts each month, actionable in 2025.
- Factory pollutes river daily since 2024—3-year tort limit resets daily, sue in 2025 if ongoing.
- Encroaching tree roots since 2021—limit restarts daily, sue in 2025 while roots persist.
- Contract for daily deliveries unmet in 2025—3-year limit resets each failure, sue anytime it continues.
Case Laws Limitation Act 1963 Section 22
Balakrishna Savalram Pujari v. Dhyaneshwar Maharaj Sansthan (1959): Supreme Court held continuing torts (like nuisance) reset limitation daily (AIR 1959 SC 798).
State of Punjab v. Darshan Singh (1996): Continuing breach of contract allows fresh limitation while breach persists (AIR 1996 SC 218).
Section 21: Effect of Substituting or Adding New Plaintiff or Defendant
Section 20: Effect of Acknowledgment or Payment by Another Person