SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(SC) 1056

K.RAMASWAMY, M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.P.BHARUCHA
Ramti Devi – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Subhashini, Indra Sawhney, J.D.JAIN, M.V.GOSWAMY, SUSHMA SURI, V.M.TARKUNDE

( 1 ). This appeal by special leave arises against the judgment and decree of the Delhi High court in RFA no. 59 of 1978 dated 26/2/1979. The plaintiff-appellant filed the suit for declaration that she is the absolute owner and is in possession of the house bearing old Municipal No. 5925 and new Municipal No. 4477, Ward No. XI, situated at Plot No. 7/18, Darya Ganj, Delhi. She claimed to have purchased the property from one Kaushalya Devi under a sale deed dated 11/5/1946 registered on 29/5/1946 and thereby she is said to be the owner. Shri Ratti Ram had no right title or interest to alienate the property by the sale deed dated 29/1/1947 which was said to have been executed to stifle the prosecution intended to be lodged against him. The trial court dismissed the suit. On appeal, the High court confirmed it.

( 2 ). The question is whether the suit is within limitation. In the evidence, it was admitted that she had knowledge of the execution and registration of the sale deed on 29/1/1947. Initially a suit was filed in 1959 but was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh suit. Admittedly, the present suit was filed on 30/7/1966. The question, therefore, is whether the suit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top