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

Pulicherla Nagaraju alias Nagaraja Reddy Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh; (2006) 11 SCC 444

The Court reaffirmed that the mere fact that a witness is related to the deceased should not be the sole reason for rejecting their testimony. Instead, the evidence should be assessed for its trustworthiness and credibility. If found reliable and probable, it can be considered, but if it raises suspicion, it should be rejected. Read more »

Dhanraj Aswani Vs. Amar S.Mulchandani & ANR

In Criminal Appeal No. 2501 of 2024, the Supreme Court of India addressed whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), is maintainable when the accused is already in judicial custody for a different case. The appeal arose from a Bombay High Court judgment that permitted... Read more » Read more »

Mohd. Hashim Vs. State of U.P. & Others (2017) 2 SCC 198

This case reinforces the principle that when the law prescribes a mandatory minimum sentence, courts do not have the authority to impose a lesser sentence unless explicitly provided by the statute. Interpretation of statutory provisions regarding minimum sentences and the discretion of the court in imposing such sentences. The Supreme Court clarified that a minimum... Read more » 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.