Limitation Act 1963 Section 13: Exclusion of time in cases where leave to sue or appeal as a pauper is applied for
In computing the period of limitation prescribed for any suit or appeal in any case where an application for leave to sue or appeal as a pauper has been made and rejected, the time during which the applicant has been prosecuting such application shall be excluded.”
Explanation Limitation Act 1963 Section 13
Section 13 of the Limitation Act, 1963 offers relief for those seeking to sue or appeal as a pauper (now termed an “indigent person” under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908).
If you apply for permission to file a suit or appeal without paying court fees due to financial hardship and your application is rejected, the time spent on that application doesn’t count toward the limitation period.
For example, if you have a 3-year limit for a suit, apply to sue as a pauper, and spend 6 months waiting for a rejection, those 6 months are excluded—you still get the full 3 years from the original start date.
This section ensures that attempting to access justice as a pauper doesn’t cut into your filing time, but it only applies if the application is rejected, not if it’s granted (since a granted application leads to filing). Section 13 promotes fairness by protecting the rights of financially challenged litigants under the Limitation Act, 1963.
Key Points Limitation Act 1963 Section 13
- Excludes time spent on a rejected pauper application from limitation periods.
- Applies to suits and appeals, not other applications.
- Covers the period from applying to rejection of pauper status.
- No exclusion if the pauper application is granted.
Examples Limitation Act 1963 Section 13
- You have a 3-year suit limit starting January 1, 2020. You apply to sue as a pauper on July 1, 2022, and it’s rejected on January 1, 2023. The 6 months (July 1, 2022–January 1, 2023) don’t count—file by January 1, 2026.
- A 30-day appeal limit begins March 1. Your pauper appeal application (March 5–March 20) is rejected. Exclude 15 days—file by April 15.
Case Law Limitation Act 1963 Section 13
Nanak v. Basanta (October 22, 1990): Supreme Court held that Section 13 excludes only the time of diligent prosecution, not delays caused by the applicant’s negligence (SCC Online: AIR 1991 SC 158).
Ram Dass v. Ram Lubhaya (January 31, 1990): Supreme Court clarified that Section 13 applies only to rejected pauper applications, not granted ones (SCC Online: AIR 1990 SC 950).