Objection application to Execution:
Execution proceedings are governed by Order 21 of
Civil Procedure Code 1908
Condonation of delay in seeking to set aside ex parte order:
Section 5 of the present Limitation Act, 1963, states that any appeal or any application under any of the provisions of Order 21, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the appellant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period. The Explanation is omitted as unnecessary. Therefore, with reference to applications under Order 21, Civil Procedure Code, there is the statutory bar in applying section 5 of the Limitation Act.
It may also be relevant to note section 32 of the Limitation Act before it was repealed by Central Act LVI of 1974. It is stated under that section that the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 is hereby repealed. Therefore, after 1st January, 1964, sub-rule (4) of rule 105 of Order 21, Civil Procedure Code, could no longer be applied, because of the express language of section 5 of the Limitation Act. That is why the Central Code, in rule 106 of Order 21, Civil Procedure Code, did not make any reference to the same saying that section 5 of the Limitation Act would be applicable.
Ayappa Naicker Vs. Subbammal, 1984 (1) Madras Law Journal Reports 214.
The aforesaid view has been reiterated and affirmed by Supreme Court om September 5, 2005 in Damodaran Pillai vs South Indian Bank Ltd and held
Thus when the period of limitation has been fixed by the provisions of the Code and not in terms of the second schedule appended to the Limitation Act, 1963, the civil court in absence of any express power cannot condone the delay. For the purpose of condonation of delay in absence of applicability of the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, the court cannot invoke its inherent power.
Mystery of Law and Justice 