Limitation and condonation under the debt recovery statute: Section 5 does not extend to appeals from Recovery Officer orders.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to an appeal under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, because the special statute prescribes a fixed thirty-day limitation period and omits any enabling provision for condonation. The statutory scheme distinguishes Section 30 from Section 19 and Section 20(3), where reference to the Limitation Act and express power to entertain delayed appeals are provided. Reading the Act with Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, the legislative intent is to exclude general condonation principles for Section 30 appeals, and the appellate authority cannot enlarge that remedy through the Rules.

---

---

Issues: Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to an appeal filed under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, so as to permit condonation of delay by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 shows a deliberate distinction between applications under Section 19 and appeals under Section 30. Section 19 is the provision to which the Act's reference to the Limitation Act is linked, while Section 20(3) expressly provides a power to entertain a delayed appeal against the Tribunal's order. Section 30, by contrast, prescribes a specific period of thirty days for an appeal against the Recovery Officer's order and contains no enabling provision for condonation. Reading Sections 19, 20, 24 and 30 together with Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963, the legislative intent to exclude Section 5 in relation to Section 30 is clear. The definition of "application" in the Rules could not expand the substantive statutory remedy or confer a power withheld by the parent Act. The special statute therefore excludes resort to general limitation principles for condonation under Section 30.

Conclusion: Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to an appeal under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, and the delay could not be condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special statute prescribes a fixed limitation period for a remedy and omits any power of condonation, the exclusion of Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is gathered from the statutory scheme and the appellate authority cannot extend limitation by invoking Section 5.

---