High Court Can’t Become Guardian of Limitation Without Pleadings : Limitation Must Be Pleaded, Not Presumed

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. High Court Can’t...

In Jai Ram Vs. Som Prakash & Anr. etc., 2025 INSC 227, the Hon’ble Supreme Court chided the High Court for setting-aside a reasoned order of the District Court on the ground of limitation when the issue of limitation was never pleaded, raised or evidence for the same led before the District Court. The underlying dispute revolved around rival wills, wherein the Appellant found about the grant of letters of administration issued way back in the year 1999, only in 2013 and thereafter filed application for its revocation before District Court in 2016, which was allowed on merits. On Appeal, the Respondent who had raised no whisper of limitation, suddenly sprang the issue of limitation as a weapon before the High Court, which allowed the appeal and set aside the order. This compelled the Supreme Court to intervene and call out the error, setting-aside the order of High Court and remanded the appeals to be considered afresh purely on merits without going into the question of limitation.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Rakesh Vaishnav v. Union of India, (2021) 1 SCC 590, 12-01-2021

In the case of protest against Farm Laws, due to failure of negotiation between Government and farmers and no solution in sight, The Supreme Court passed an extraordinary order of stay of implementation of the Farm Laws directed and Expert Committee set up by Court to resolve the conflict between Read more »

National Fertilizers Ltd and Another Vs. P.K.Khanna; 2005 (7) SCC 597

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in a Departmental enquiry, the Decision/order by disciplinary authority, is required to give reasons only when it disagrees with finding of the enquiry officer and not when it concurs with that finding. Also, held that the mere quoting of what transpired would not Read more »

Ambience Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. Ambience Island Apartment Owners, (2021) 2 SCC 163

The Supreme Court held that the execution proceedings and original proceedings are separate and independent. An appeal under S. 23 of the Consumer Protection Act will not lie to Supreme Court against an order which has been passed in the course of execution proceedings. An appeal under S. 23 is Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.