IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 11.03.2026 Harjeet Kaur @ Nachhattar Kaur ...... Petitioner versus Jaswinder Singh and another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present: Mr. K.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Manpinder Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bokolia, Advocate for respondent No.1.

****

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. The present revision petition is directed against order dated 06.02.2025 passed by the Trial Court, whereby application filed by defendant seeking rejection of the plaint under VII Rule 11 CPC stands dismissed.

2. Plaintiff instituted present suit on 29.11.2022 propounding agreement to sell dated 17.06.2016 claimed to have been executed by defendant in his favour. As per plaint, the parties agreed to get the sale deed executed on or before 15.06.2018. Defendant claims that the present suit is barred by limitation. The limitation for instituting a suit for specific performance of a contract is governed by Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which prescribes a period of three years commencing from the date fixed for the performance. As per the plaint, when the date for performing contract was fixed as 15.06.2018, the suit instituted on 29.11.2022 cannot be held to be within limitation. Trial Court has dismissed the application holding that the question of limitation being mixed question of law and fact, the same cannot be adjudicated at the nascent stage.

3. Having heard counsel for the parties and after carefully perusing the records of the case, this Court finds that plaintiff in para No.4 of the plaint, pleaded as under:-

“4. That Hon'ble Supreme Court of India waived off the limitation for filing the suits due to pandemic of Corona (Covid-19) civil disease and the same remained in force for a long period. The plaintiff was under this impression that the said relaxation of the delay present is period for filing the civil suit is still continuing. suit So in intentional filing the neither nor willful, rather due to the reasons mentioned above. However the plaintiff remained always ready and willing for getting the sale deed executed from the defendant no.1 in respect of the suit land, even litigation on the basis of agreement in question is continuing since long. A separate application for condonation of delay in filing the present suit is also being filed herewith.”

4. Supreme Court by way of order dated 10.01.2022 observed as under:-

“1. In March, 2020, this Court took Suo Motu cognizance of the difficulties that might be faced by the litigants in filing petitions/applications/suits/ appeals/ all other quasi proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or under any special laws (both Central and/or State) due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. On 23.03.2020, this Court directed extension of the period of limitation in all proceedings before Courts/Tribunals including this Court w.e.f. 15.03.2020 till further orders. On 08.03.2021. the order dated 23.03.2020 was brought to an end. permitting the relaxation of period of limitation between

15.03.2020 and 14.03.2021. While doing so, it was made clear that the period of limitation would start from 15.03.2021.

3. Thereafter, due to a second surge in COVID-19 cases, the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) intervened in the Suo Motu proceedings by filing Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 seeking restoration of the order dated 23.03.2020 relaxing limitation. The aforesaid Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 was disposed of by this Court vide Order dated 23.09.2021, wherein this Court extended the period of limitation in all proceedings before the Courts/Tribunals including this Court w.e.f 15.03.2020 till 02.10.2021.

4. The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association in the context of the spread of the new variant of the COVID-19 and the drastic surge in