Limitation Act, 1963 · Chapter III: Computation of Period of Limitation
Section 21: Effect of substituting or adding new plaintiff or defendant
(1) Where after the institution of a suit, a new plaintiff or defendant is substituted or added, the suit shall, as regards him, be deemed to have been instituted when he was so made a party:
Provided that where the court is satisfied that the omission to include a new plaintiff or defendant was due to a mistake made in good faith it may direct that the suit as regards such plaintiff or defendant shall be deemed to have been instituted on any earlier date.
(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall apply to a case where a party is added or substituted owing to assignment or devolution of any interest during the pendency of a suit or where a plaintiff is made a defendant or a defendant is made a plaintiff.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 15 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 21
-
Odisha State Financial Corporation v. Vigyan Chemical Industries and Others
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant u/Art.227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the civil proceedings and the orders passed by the Courts below regarding the computation of interest…
- B. Santoshamma & Anr. v. D. Sarala & Anr.
- Pankajbhai Rameshbhai Zalavadiya v. Jethabhai Kalabhai Zalavadiya (Deceased)
- M.P. Steel Corporation v. Commissioner of Central Excise
- Ramalingam Chettiar v. P.K. Pattabiraman and Anr.
- Velamuri Venkata Sivaprasad (Dead) by L.Rs. v. Kothuri Venkateswarlu (Dead) by L.Rs. and Ors.
- Mukesh Kumar and Ors. v. Col. Harbans Waraich and Ors.
- Karuppaswamy and Others v. C. Ramamurthy