Section 14 limitation relief allows exclusion of bona fide writ proceedings when a claimant is relegated to a civil suit.

Time spent in bona fide and diligent writ proceedings may be excluded for limitation purposes under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, where the claimant is subsequently directed to pursue a civil suit. The article notes that relief under Article 226 was declined because the claim was recoverable in civil action and writ jurisdiction is discretionary, but the petitioner was not to be left remediless after being relegated to the civil court. The period spent before the High Court and the Supreme Court was therefore treated as excludable in computing limitation for the proposed suit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the time spent by the petitioner in prosecuting the writ proceedings before the High Court and this Court was liable to be excluded while computing limitation for a civil suit under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and whether the petitioner could be relegated to the civil court despite refusal of relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The writ remedy was declined on the ground that the claim was recoverable in a civil action and the relief under Article 226 was discretionary. Since the petitioner had pursued the writ proceedings diligently and bona fide, and the High Court had expressly relegated him to a suit, the petitioner could not be left without a remedy. In these circumstances, the period spent in the writ proceedings was held liable to be excluded for the purpose of limitation in the civil suit.

Conclusion: The petitioner was permitted to issue notice to the Municipality and thereafter institute a civil suit, with the time spent in the High Court and this Court to be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

---