https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273043 Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act was construed as applying to special or local laws prescribing their own limitation period, and the phrase "for the purpose of determining any period of limitation" was read as wide enough to permit Section 5 only where the statutory scheme so allows. The Court held that this does not make every provision of the Limitation Act applicable to special enactments; only the specified provisions operate unless expressly excluded, and the rest apply only by express adoption. On that construction, Section 5 did not apply proprio vigore to an appeal under Section 8(3) of the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, so delay could not be condoned. en-us Mon, 14 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jun 2018 16:47:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273043 Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act was construed as applying to special or local laws prescribing their own limitation period, and the phrase "for the purpose of determining any period of limitation" was read as wide enough to permit Section 5 only where the statutory scheme so allows. The Court held that this does not make every provision of the Limitation Act applicable to special enactments; only the specified provisions operate unless expressly excluded, and the rest apply only by express adoption. On that construction, Section 5 did not apply proprio vigore to an appeal under Section 8(3) of the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, so delay could not be condoned. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 14 Jan 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273043