https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175352 Time spent in execution proceedings was not excludable for limitation because the earlier proceeding was not for the same relief as an application for a final mortgage decree, and the statutory requirement of due diligence and good faith before a court unable to entertain the matter was not met. Court closure also did not extend the prescribed limitation period beyond the narrow rule allowing filing on reopening where the period expired during closure, so the application remained time-barred. The Limitation Act was treated as mandatory, and no general equitable discretion existed to relieve hardship outside its express terms. en-us Thu, 07 Feb 1935 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:24:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175352 Time spent in execution proceedings was not excludable for limitation because the earlier proceeding was not for the same relief as an application for a final mortgage decree, and the statutory requirement of due diligence and good faith before a court unable to entertain the matter was not met. Court closure also did not extend the prescribed limitation period beyond the narrow rule allowing filing on reopening where the period expired during closure, so the application remained time-barred. The Limitation Act was treated as mandatory, and no general equitable discretion existed to relieve hardship outside its express terms. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Feb 1935 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175352