MCQ The Limitation Act, 1963
MCQ The Limitation Act, 1963
MCQ The Limitation Act, 1963
3. Period spent in prosecuting the case before the Consumer Forum can be
(a) partly excluded
(b) included
(c) excluded
(d) partly included.
4. Under the Limitation Act, 1963, the court has no...... power, outside the Act, to relieve a
litigant from the provisions of the Act
(a) general
(b) inherent
(c) over-riding
(d) general or inherent or over-riding.
5. Which of the following statements is correct as regards the sections and the articles in
the Limitation Act, 1963
a) the sections and the articles lay down the general principles of jurisdiction
b) the sections and the articles prescribe the period of limitation A
c) the sections lay . down the general principles of jurisdiction and the articles prescribe the
period of limitation applicable in matters provided therein
d) the sections prescribe the period of limitation applicable in matters provided therein and
the articles lay down the general principles of jurisdiction.
6. If the money suit filed within three years from the date on which cause of action arises
then the suit
(a) does not relate to Limitation Act
(b) is not barred by limitation
(c) is barred by limitation
(d) depends on application for condonation of delay.
(b) the whole of India including the State of Jammu and Kashmir I
(c) the whole of India except the North Eastern States of India.
(d) the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and the North- Eastern States
of India.
12. Under section 3, Limitation Act, 1963, a claim by way of .......is treated as a cross-suit
(a) set-off
(b) counter-claim
(c) set-off or counter-claim
(d) set-off and counter-claim.
13. Under section 3, Limitation Act, 1963 cross suit by way of set-off shall be deemed to
have been instituted
(a) on the same day-as the suit in which set- off is pleaded has been filed
(b) on the day on which the set-off is pleaded
(c) either (a) or (b) whichever is beneficial to the defendant
(d) either (a) or (b) whichever is beneficial to the plaintiff.
14. Counter-claim, under section 3, Limitation Act, 1963, shall be deemed to have been
instituted
(a) on the same day as the suit in which counter-claim is made has been filed
(b) on the day on which the counter-claim is made
17. Under section 3, Limitation Act, 1963 the court is required to consider the question of
limitation
(a) only when objection to limitation is raised by the defendant
(b) only when the defendant does not confess judgment
(c) only when the defendant does not admit his liability
(d) suo motu even when the defendant has not taken any objection of limitation or has
confessed judgment or has admitted this liability in the written statement.
19. Section 3, Limitation Act is applicable to the period of limitation prescribed by any
(a) local law i
(b) special law
(c) both (a) and (b)
(d) neither (a) nor (b).
21. For the purposes of section 3, Limitation Act, 1963, limitation is checked
(a) when the plaint is actually presented in the proper court
(b) when the plaint_ is presented even in a court not competent to try the suit
(c) when the plaint in presented by the part
(d) all the above. K
23. Under the Limitation Act, 1963, the court has no power to extend the limitation on the
ground of
(a) equitable considerations
(b) hardship
(c) necessary implication
(d) either (a) or (b) or (c).
26. Section 4, Limitation Act, 1963 applies where the case is governed by.
(a) the Limitation Act, 1963
(b) any local law
(c) any special law
(d) either (a) or (b) or (c).
27. An application for leave to contest the eviction proceedings before the Rent Controller
attracts
(a) section 4, Limitation Act, 1963
(b) section 10, General Clauses Act, 1897
(c) both (a) and (b)
(d) either (a) or (b).
34. In matters of condonation of delay under section 5, Limitation Act the Government, has
to be accorded
(a) treatment similar to a private citizen and no latitude is permissible
(b) treatment stricter than a private citizen as the Government is supposed to act in a
more responsible manner
(c) treatment similar to a private citizen, however, certain amount of latitude is not
impermissible
(d) either (a) or (b).
36. In the matters of condonation of delay under section 5, Limitation Act 1963, relating to
Government
(a) strict proof of everyday's delay by the Government should not be insisted upon
(b) strict proof of everyday's delay by the Government should be insisted upon
(c) strict proof of everyday's delay by the Government may not be insisted upon
(d) strict proof of everyday's delay by the Government may be insisted upon.
37. In the matters of condonation of delay under section 5, Limitation Act, 1963, public
institutions like banks should
(a) be treated at par with private individuals
(b) be treated at par with private institutions
(c) be treated at par with corporate body
(d) neither be treated at par with (a), nor (b), nor (c).
39. The delay under section 5, Limitation Act, 1963 can be condoned on
(a) an oral application
(b) a verbal application
(c) a written application
(d) either (a) or (b) or (c).
47. Period of limitation stands extended, by virtue of section 6 of Limitation Act for a
maximum period of
(a) 1 year
(b) 3years
(c) 6years
(d) 12 years.
51. In computing the period of limitation for appeal, review or revision, the time requisite
for obtaining a copy of the decree or order appealed shall be excluded under
(a) section 12(1)
(b) section 12(2)
(c) section 13(3)
(d) section 14(4).
52. In computing the period of limitation for application to set aside an award, the time
requisite in obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded under
(a) section 12(1)
(b) section 12(2)
(c) section 12(3)
(d) section 12(4).
62. Period during which proceedings stand stayed by an injunction or order is excluded
(a) under section 14
(b) under section 15
(c) under section 13
(d) under section 16.
64. Time taken in proceedings to set aside the sale, in suit for possession by a purchaser in
execution, is liable to be excluded
(a) under section 15(4)
(b) under section 15(2)
(c) under section 15(3)
(d) under section 15(1).
68. The fraud contemplated by section 17, Limitation Act, 1963 is that of
(a) the plaintiff
(b) the defendant
(c) a third person
(d) either (a) or (b) or (c).
69. Whether a plaintiff could with reasonable diligence have discovered the fraud or
mistake under section 17, Limitation Act, is a
(a) question of fact to be decided on the basis of facts disclosed in each case
(b) question of law
(c) mixed question of fact and law
(d) substantial question of law.
70. Under section 17, Limitation Act, 1963, the limitation starts running from
(a) the date of the mistake
(b) the date of discovery of mistake
(c) either (a) or (b), depending on the facts and circumstances of the case
(d) either (a) or (b), as per the discretion of the court.
71. In case of mistake, under section 17, Limitation Act, 1963, the limitation shall start
running from
(a) the date of the mistake
(b) the date when the mistake with due diligence could have been discovered
(c) either (a) or (b), whichever is earlier
(d) either (a) or (b), whichever is beneficial to u the suitor.
77. Under section 25 the easement rights are acquired by continuous & uninterrupted user
(a) for 12 years
(b) for 20 years
(c) for 30 years
(d) for 3 years.
78. Under section 25, the easement rights over the property belonging to the Government
are acquired by continuous & uninterrupted user 1
(a) for 12 years
(b) for 20 years
(c) for 30 years
(d) for 60 years.
79. A suit against the obstruction in the enjoyment of easementary rights acquired under
section 25 must be filed
(a) within 2 years of such obstruction
(b) within 1 year of such obstruction
(c) within 3 years of such obstruction
(d) within 12 years of such obstruction.
83. A suit for possession based on the right of previous possession & not on title can be filed
(a) within one year of dispossession
(b) within three years of dispossession
(c) within twelve years of dispossession
(d) within six months of dispossession.
84. A suit for possession of immovable property based on title can be filed -
(a) within one year
(b) within three years
(c) within twelve years
(d) within six months.
85. For a suit filed by or on behalf of Central Government or any State Government, the
period of limitation is
(a) one year
(b) three years
(E) twelve years
(d) thirty years.
88. Under section 21, a suit is deemed to have been instituted, in case of a new plaintiff
impleaded/added
(a) on the date on which the new plaintiff is impleaded
(b) on the date on which the suit was initially instituted
(c) on the date on which the application for implea-cling a new plaintiff is made
(d) none of the above.
89. Under section 21, qua a defendant a suit is deemed to have been instituted against a
newly added defendant
(a) on the date on which the new defendant is impleaded
90. Under section 21, can the court direct the suit to have been instituted on an earlier date
(a) yes, if the omission to include the party was due to a mistake made in good faith
(b) yes, if the omission to include party was deliberate
(c) in both (a) & (b)
(d) neither (a) nor (b).
92. Section 21 does not apply in (c) both (a) & (b)
(a) cases of devolution of interest during the pendency of the ‘suit ‘
(b) cases of assignment of interest during the pendency of the suit
(c) case of transposition of a plaintiff as a defendant & vice-versa
(d) all the above.
94. Law of limitation has to be strictly construed. In view of the same section 5 of
Limitation Act has to be construed
(a) strictly
(b) liberally
(c) harmoniously
(d) ejusdem-generis.
99. Section 27 of Limitation Act does not apply to cases for recovery of possession
(a) where no limitation period has been prescribed
(b) where the limitation period has been prescribed
(c) both (a) & (b)
(d) neither (a) nor (b).
103. Acknowledgement made after the period of limitation but before the opening of the
courts during the period when the courts are closed on the last date of expiry of
limitation
(a) is of no effect
(b) extends the period of limitation
(c) gives rise to an independent reinforce able contract
(<1) both (b) &(¢).
104. Acknowledgement made by a person other than a person under liability is good if
(a) the person .making it is relative of the person under liability
(b) the person making it is an agent of the person under liability
(c) the person making it is a servant of the person under liability
(d) the person making it is the master of the person under liability.
106. Under section 18(2) oral evidence of date of acknowledgement is permissible if the
acknowledgement
(a) is dated
(b) is undated
(c) date in the acknowledgement is altered
(d) in all above cases.
109. Under section 19, the part payment of debt or interest has to be
(a) within the period of limitation under the Act
(b) within the period prescribed for repayment
(c) within the period of limitation prescribed under any other enactment
(d) all the above.
110. Under section 19, the part payment acknowledgement extends the period of
limitation
(a) from the date of expiry of initial period of limitation
(b) from the date of payment
(c) from the date of the writing evidencing payment
(d) from the date of extended period of limitation.
111. Under section 19 for extension of period of limitation the part payment must be
(a) in the handwriting of the person
(b) in the writing signed by the person
(c) either (a) or (b)
(d) both (a) and (b)
118. Period of limitation for suits relating to trusts and trust property is
(a) 1 year
(b) 3 years
(c) 3 years to 12 years
121. Period of limitation for application for substitution of the legal representatives of a
party to the suit is
(a) 10 days '
(b) 30 days
(c) 60 days
(d) 90 days.
127. Period of limitation for suits not specifically provided under the Schedule is
(a) 1 year
(b) 2years
(c) 3 years
(d) 12 years
129. Under section 12(2) of Limitation Act the time taken/elapsed between the date of
judgment & the date of decree
(a) has to be excluded without any application for certified copy having been made during
this period
(b) has to be excluded only if any application for obtaining the certified copy has been made
during this period
(c) in both (a) & (b)
(d) in neither (a) nor (b) nor (c).
130. A judgment was announced on 2-1-2002 & the decree prepared on 10-1-2002.
Application for certified copy made on 5-1-2002 and the copy was ready on 15-1-2002,
under section 12 the period to be excluded is
(a) from 2-1-2002 to 15-1-2002
(b) from 2-1-2002 to 5-1-2002
(c) from 5-1-2002 to 10-1-2002
(d) from 5-1-2002 to 15-1-2002.
132. Where the party is entitled to sue in two courts of concurrent jurisdiction and one of
them is closed on the last day of limitation
(a) the party is bound to sue in the court which is open on the last day of limitation and the
benefit of section 4 of Limitation Act shall not be available
(b) the party is not bound to sue in the court which is open on the last day of limitation and
shall get the benefit of section 4 of Limitation Act notwithstanding the fact that the other
court is open
(c) section 4 of Limitation Act shall not apply at all
(d) none of the above.
133. Whether on a particular day, the court is open or closed within the meaning of
section 4 of Limitation Act is a
(a) pure question of fact
(b) pure question of law
(c) mixed question of fact & law
(d) either (b) or (c). K
136. Under section 6 of Limitation Act, where several disabilities co-exist concurrently in
the plaintiff the time does not commence to run against him
(a) till the first disability ceases to exist
(b) till the two, if there are more than two, disabilities cease to exist '
(c) till all the disabilities cease to exist
(d) either (a) or (b).
137. An acknowledgment
(a) extinguishes the original cause of action
(c) three years
(d) one year.
138. The period of limitation for filing a suit to recover possession of movable or immovable
property comprised in religious or charitable endowment, transferred for valuable
consideration, under Article 96 of the Schedule
(a) thirty years
(b) twelve years
(c) three years
139. For a suit to enforce a right of pre-emption, the period of limitation under Article 97
of the Schedule, is
(a) one year
(b) two years
(c) three years
(d) twelve years.
140. A suit for possession of a hereditary office under Article 107 of the Schedule, can be
filed within the period of limitation of
(a) thirty years
(b) twelve years
(c) six years
(d) three years.
141. A Mitakshara coparcener can file a suit to setaside alienation of ancestral property
by his father, under Article 109 of the Schedule, within the period of limitation of
(a) twelve years
(b) one year
(c) three years
(d) Thirty year
142. The period of limitation for filing a suit for specific performance under Article 54 of
the Schedule is
(a) one year
(b) three years
(c) twelve years
(d) thirty years.
143. For a suit to recover possession of a movable property conveyed or bequeathed in trust
and afterwards transferred by the trustee for a valuable consideration, under Article 93 of the
Schedule, the period of limitation is
(a) thirty years
(b) one year
(c) twelve years
(d) thirty years.
144. A suit by a person excluded from a joint family property to enforce aright to share
therein, under Article 110‘ of the Schedule, can be filed within the period of limitation
of
(a) one year
(b) three years
(c) twelve years
146. Under Article 112 of the Schedule, the period of limitation for filing a suit by the
Central Government is
(a) 3 years if relates to movable property and 12 years if relates to immovable property
(b) 12 years if relates to movable property and thirty years if relates to immovable property
(c) 30 years for any suit
(d) 60 years for any suit.
149. The period of limitation for setting aside a sale on execution of a decree, is
(a) 180 days
(b) 90 days
(c) 60 days
(d) 30 days.
150. An appreciation for special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court can be filed within
(a) 30 days to 180 days depending upon the subject-matter
(b) 30 days to 90 days depending upon the subject-matter
(c) 60 days to 180 days depending upon the subject-matter
(d) 6O days to 90 days depending upon the subject-matter.
151. The period of limitation for preferring an appeal to the court of sessions from an
order of sentence is
(a) 30 days
(b) 60 days
(c) 90 days
(d) 15 days.
152. The period of limitation for preferring an appeal to the High Court from an order
of sentence, other than the sentence of death, is
(a) 15 days
(b) 30 days
(c) 60 days
(d) 90 days.
153. The period of limitation for preferring an appeal to the High Court from a decree or
order, is
(a) 15 days
(b) 30 days
(c) 6O’clays
(d) 90 days.
154. The period of limitation to preter an appeal to a court other than the High Court,
from any decree or order, is
(a) 15 days
(b) 30 days
(c) 60 days
(d) 90 days.
155. Where a plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence and in good faith, another
civil proceeding, relating to the same matter in issue, in a court which, from defect of
jurisdiction is unable to entertain it, the period so spent by the plaintiff is liable to be
excluded in computing the , period of limitation for a suit, under
(a) section 12 of Limitation Act
(b) section 13 of Limitation Act
(c) section 14 of Limitation Act
(d) section 15 of Limitation Act.
159. A judgment was passed on 10-7-2002, and the decree prepared on 25-7-2002. An
application for certified copy was made on 11-7-2002 and the certified copy was ready
on 1-8-2002, and delivery of certified copy was taken on 5-8- 2002, under section 12, the
period to be excluded is
(a) 11-7-2002 to 1-8-2002
(b) 11-7-2002 to 5-8-2002
(c) 10-7-2002 to 1-8-2002
(d) 10-7-2002 to 5-8-2002.
161. Which of the following amounts to presenting a civil proceedings with "due diligence and
in good faith” within the meaning of section 14 of Limitation Act
(a) failure to pay the requisite court fee found deficient
(b) error of judgment in valuing a suit
(c) both (a) and (b)
(d) neither (a) nor (b).
163. In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the
objection of non-impalement of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff
continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the
plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action
and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit,
under section 14 of Limitation Act is
(a) liable to be excluded on the ground that the plaintiff was prosecuting the earlier suit with
due diligence and in good faith
(b) not liable to be excluded as the plaintiff cannot be said to be prosecuting the earlier suit
with due diligence and in good faith
(c) liable to excluded under section 14(3) of Limitation Act
(d) to be excluded or not to be excluded is in the discretion of the court.
164. Negotiations for settlement taking place between a claimant and a person against
whom claim is made
(a) bars the defendant from pleading a statute of limitation where the negotiations have led to
delay in bringing the action by the claimant
(b) does not debar the defendant from pleading a statute of limitation even though the
negotiations have led to delay in bringing the action by the claimant
(c) may bar the defendant from pleading a statue of limitation depending on the facts and
circumstances of each case
(d) shall bar the defendant from pleading a statute of limitation absolutely.
165. The period of limitation for a suit, to redeem or recover possession of immovable
property mortgaged, by a mortgagor, is
(a) 12 years
(b) 30 years
(c) 6 years
(d) 3 years.
166. For a suit to recover surplus collections received by the mortgagee after the
mortgage has been satisfied, the period of limitation is
(a) 12 years
(b) 30 years
(c) 1 year
(d) 3years.
167. A suit for foreclosure by a mortgagee can be filed within the prescribed period of
limitation is
(a) 30 years
(b) 12 years
(c) 6 years
(d) 5years.
169. In which of the following cases the Calcutta High Court held that "Though"
Limitation of 1 year as provided in Contempt of Courts Act, in fit case provisions of
section 5 and 17 of Limitation Act can be applied by virtue of section 29(2) of
Limitation Act”?
(a) Subrata Kundu v. Kshiti Goswami, AIR 2010 Cal 44
(b) Nirpendra Ch. Dey v. Collector, AIR 2010 Cal 49
(c) Anma Ghosh v. Vimla, AIR 2010 Cal 62.
(d) Vikashini Ghosh v. A.K. Roy, AIR 2010 Cal
173. If there is execution of decree for possession and purchaser comes on record after 12
years from date of decree and not from date of purchase of property section ..............
will apply?
(a) section 21(2)
(b) section 21(1)
(c) section 21(3)
(d) section 21(4).
174. If in a case of substitution of legal heirs of respondent, a prayer for setting aside
abatement is implicit, the separate application for setting aside abatement
(a) not necessary
(b) necessary
(c) conditional.
(d) none of the above.
175. If a plaintiff takes possession of disputed shop by way of part performance, it is not
open to him to take plea that he acquired title by
(a) adverse possession
ANSWERS
1. (c) 36 (a) 71 (c) 106 (b) 141 (a)
2. (a) 37 (d) 72 (c) 107 (c) 142 (b)
3. (c) 38 (d) 73 (b) 108 (b) 143 (a)
4. (d) 39 (c) 74 (b) 109 (a) 144 (c)
5. (c) 40 (a) 75 (d) 110 (b) 145 (d)
6. (b) 41 (c) 76 (a) 111 (c) 146 (c)
7. (a) 42 (c) 77 (b) 112 (a) 147 (a)
8. (c) 43 (a) 78 (c) 113 (c) 148 (b)
9. (d) 44 (d) 79 (a) 114 (b) 149 (c)
10. (d) 45 (a) 80 (a) 115 (c) 150 (d)
11. (d) 46 (c) 81 (c) 116 (a) 151 (a)
12. (c) 47 (b) 82 (d) 117 (b) 152 (c)
13. (a) 48 (d) 83 (c) 118 (c) 153 (d)
14. (b) 49 (d) 84 (c) 119 (d) 154 (b)
15. (d) 50 (d) 85 (d) 120 (b) 155 (c)
16. (a) 51 (b) 86 (d) 121 (d) 156 (a)
17. (d) 52 (d) 87 (b) 122 (b) 157 (c)
18. (d) 53 (a) 88 (a) 123 (b) 158 (b)
19. (c) 54 (c) 89 (a) 124 (c) 159 (a)
20. (b) 55 (a) 90 (a) 125 (b) 160 (b)
21. (a) 56 (a) 91 (c) 126 (c) 161 (d)
22. (d) 57 (b) 92 (d) 127 (c) 162 (a)
23. (d) 58 (d) 93 (a) 128 (c) 163 (b)
24. (c) 59 (d) 94 (b) 129 (a) 164 (b)
25. (b) 60 (d) 95 (d) 130 (d) 165 (b)
26. (d) 61 (b) 96 (c) 131 (a) 166 (d)
27. (b) 62 (b) 97 (a) 132 (b) 167 (a)
28. (a) 63 (c) 98 (c) 133 (a) 168 (c)
29. (b) 64 (a) 99 (a) 134 (d) 169 (a)
30. (b) 65 (d) 100 (a) 135 (c) 170 (a)
31. (b) 66 (d) 101 (b) 136 (c) 171 (b)
32. (d) 67 (a) 102 (a) 137 (c) 172 (c)
33. (d) 68 (b) 103 (a) 138 (b) 173 (a)
34. (c) 69 (a) 104 (b) 139 (c) 174 (a)
35. (b) 70 (b) 105 (a) 140 (b) 175 (a)
The answers are suggestive. Kindly verify from the basic documents, statutes,
judgments, gazette notifications or recommended text books to remove any doubt
or clearance.