Advocates Act, 1961 - Chapter V: Conduct of Advocates

Section 39 of the Advocates Act, 1961: Application of Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963

Section 39 of the Advocates Act, 1961 applies Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963, so far as may be, to disciplinary appeals under Section 37 and Section 38.

Text of Section 39

Meaning and explanation of Section 39

1. Section 39 applies only to appeals under Sections 37 and 38

The provision is specifically tied to disciplinary appeals under Section 37 and Section 38. It does not by its own terms extend Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act to every proceeding under the Advocates Act.

2. What does Section 5 of the Limitation Act mean?

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 deals with extension of the prescribed period in specified appeals and applications. In substance, a delayed appeal may be admitted where the appellant satisfies the appellate forum that there was sufficient cause for not filing within the prescribed period.

Through Section 39, this principle is relevant to the 60-day appeal periods provided by Sections 37 and 38, subject to the facts, the explanation for delay and the applicable procedural requirements.

3. What does Section 12 of the Limitation Act mean?

Section 12 deals with exclusion of time in legal proceedings when computing limitation. Among other matters, it excludes the day from which the limitation period is reckoned and, for an appeal, provides for exclusion of the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from, in accordance with that provision.

4. What does "so far as may be" mean?

Section 39 does not mechanically reproduce every part of Sections 5 and 12 in every circumstance. The phrase "so far as may be" requires those provisions to be applied in a manner compatible with the statutory appeal scheme under the Advocates Act.

Section 39 and the 60-day appeal periods

Condonation of delay under Section 5

Section 39 makes Section 5 relevant where a disciplinary appeal is filed after the prescribed period. The appellant must explain the delay and satisfy the appellate forum that sufficient cause prevented filing within time. Condonation is therefore not automatic merely because Section 39 applies.

Exclusion of time under Section 12

Section 12 affects computation rather than simply excusing delay. Depending on the facts and the applicable subsection, specified periods may be excluded while calculating whether the appeal was filed within time. This can include time requisite for obtaining the order appealed from.

Communication of the disciplinary order remains important

Sections 37 and 38 expressly use communication of the disciplinary order as the starting point for the 60-day appeal period. The Supreme Court has recognized the significance of this wording when construing limitation under the Advocates Act.

Section 39 does not create an automatic stay

Condonation of delay or exclusion of time is distinct from suspension of the disciplinary order. Section 40 separately governs stay of the order appealed against.

Related provisions

• Section 35 - State Bar Council disciplinary proceedings and punishment.
• Section 36 - Disciplinary powers of the Bar Council of India.
• Section 37 - Appeal to the Bar Council of India within 60 days from communication.
• Section 38 - Appeal to the Supreme Court within 60 days from communication.
• Section 40 - Stay of disciplinary order during appeal.
• Section 42 - Powers of disciplinary committees.
• Section 44 - Review of disciplinary committee orders.

Official legal sources

The current text of the Advocates Act, 1961 may be checked through India Code: India Code - Advocates Act, 1961.

Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 may be checked through the official India Code text: India Code - Limitation Act, 1963.

A Supreme Court judgment discussing communication of orders and limitation under Sections 37 and 38 may be checked here: Supreme Court of India - Judgment on communication and limitation under the Advocates Act.