https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281020 The Supreme Court considered whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act could be applied to condone delay in a revision under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. It reasoned that the Tribunal under the special Act had the trappings of a court and decided disputes in judicial proceedings, so Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act attracted Sections 4 to 24, including Section 5, unless expressly excluded by the special statute. Distinguishing cases involving special limitation schemes, the Court observed that the earlier Division Bench view appeared incorrect and directed placement of the matter before the Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger Bench. en-us Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2019 14:31:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281020 The Supreme Court considered whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act could be applied to condone delay in a revision under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983. It reasoned that the Tribunal under the special Act had the trappings of a court and decided disputes in judicial proceedings, so Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act attracted Sections 4 to 24, including Section 5, unless expressly excluded by the special statute. Distinguishing cases involving special limitation schemes, the Court observed that the earlier Division Bench view appeared incorrect and directed placement of the matter before the Chief Justice of India for constitution of a larger Bench. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281020