Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SANGEETA K. VISHEN, NIRAL R. MEHTA
Chigrabhai Rajiyabhai Chudhari – Appellant
Versus
Balubhai Jagabhai Chaudhari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(SANGEETA K. VISHEN, J.)
By this Appeal, the appellants have challenged judgment dated 28.04.2017 passed by learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bardoli by which, the Special Civil Suit no.8 of 2017 has been rejected.
2. Vide order dated 03.11.2017, notice was issued for final disposal and the paper-book having been made available, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their status in the Special Civil Suit no.8 of 2017.
3. Mr.Dipak Dave, learned advocate for the appellants- applicant-original plaintiffs, submitted that the Collector, by passing an order on 04.03.1978 granted permission to sell the land of which necessary mutation entry no.1484 has been posted in the revenue record and was certified on 30.05.1978. Thereafter, on 10.05.1978, a registered sale deed was executed by the forefathers of the plaintiffs and some of the plaintiffs in favour of defendant nos.6 to 8 with respect to land bearing survey no.91 block no.131 admeasuring acres 11 – gunthas 28 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘land in question’). It is submitted that since division was not permissible, the sale deed was executed and thus, on
The court ruled that the rejection of the plaint was erroneous as it did not consider the merits of the case, emphasizing that the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact.
A suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell is time-barred when filed long after the first refusal, as seen in prior legal proceedings.
The court reaffirmed that suits for specific performance must be filed within the limitation period, and failure to do so results in dismissal.
The suit was filed after a delay of 28 years and no genuine cause of action was found from the plaint, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
The court upheld the trial court's rejection of the plaint as time-barred, emphasizing the necessity of timely enforcement of agreements and the court's duty to examine plaints for cause of action.
Valid sale deeds can only be challenged through competent court orders; transactions executed in violation of interim injunctions are treated as void.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to sue for specific performance can be lost due to the limitation period, leading to the grant of possession to the defendants.
Limitation is a mixed question of fact and law, requiring evidence for determination; a plaint cannot be dismissed at the outset if it presents a legitimate claim under the law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
