The decision of a Court allowing a suit which had been instituted after the period prescribed is not vitiated for want of jurisdiction. Discuss it in the light of provisions under section 3 relating to Bar of Limitation

Bar of Limitation Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 provides that any suit, appeal or application if made beyond the prescribed period of limitation, it is the duty of the Court not to proceed with such suits irrespective of the fact whether the plea of limitation has been set up in defence or not. The provisions of Section 3 of the Act are mandatory. The Court can suo motu take note of the question of limitation. The question whether a suit is barred by limitation should be decided on the facts as they stood on the date of presentation of the plaint. It is a vital section upon which the whole Limitation Act depends for its efficacy. The effect of Section 3 of the Act is not to deprive the Court of its jurisdiction. Therefore, decision of a court allowing a suit which had been instituted after the period prescribed is not vitiated for want of jurisdiction. A decree passed in a time barred suit is not a nullity.