Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bharat Singh vs Charan Singh on 6 January, 2026
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia, Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:453
1 WA-3481-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 6 th OF JANUARY, 2026
WRIT APPEAL No. 3481 of 2025
BHARAT SINGH AND OTHERS
Versus
CHARAN SINGH
Appearance:
Shri Ankur Maheshwari and Shri F.A. Qureshi, Advocates for the
appellants.
Shri Rohit Bansal, Advocate for respondent.
ORDER
Per: Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia This appeal, under section 2 of Madhya Pradesh (Uchcha Nyayalaya Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 has been filed against the order dated 27/2/2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP No. 37734/2024.
2. Challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it is submitted by counsel for appellant that respondent had filed an application under sections 115, 116 of the M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 ( for short "the MPLRC") for correction of revenue record. However, the learned single judge has treated the said application under section 108 of the MPLRC. It is submitted that at the relevant time the period of limitation for correction of Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 08-01-2026 18:35:22 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:453 2 WA-3481-2025 revenue record was one year and, therefore, the application filed under sections 105, 116 of the MPLRC was hopelessly barred by time.
3. Heard, learned counsel for the appellant.
4. Before considering the reasoning assigned by the learned single Judge, this Court is of considered opinion that if the contentions raised by the appellant are accepted, then the moot question for consideration is as to whether the application filed by the respondent under sections 115 and 116 of MPLRC can be treated as barred by time or not ?
5. Law of limitation is a procedural law and, therefore, it has a retrospective effect unless and until it is made prospective in operation. When an application under sections 115 and 116 of MPLRC was filed, the provision of limitation, as provided under section under section 116 of MPLRC, was in force. However, during the pendency of appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal in Appeal No. 853/Appeal/2017-18, the provision of limitation, as provided under section 116 of MPLRC, was omitted which means that after the omission of section 116 of MPLRC, at present there is no period of limitation for filing an application for correction of revenue record. Admittedly, appeal is a continuation of original proceedings. Therefore, it is clear that since section 116 of MPLRC was omitted during the pendency of proceedings and as the law of limitation is procedural and has a retrospective effect, this Court is of considered opinion that even if the contention of the appellant is considered, still it will not be possible to accept his contention because in view of the subsequent amendment in MPLRC which came during the pendency of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND SHRIVASTAVA Signing time: 08-01-2026 18:35:22 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:453 3 WA-3481-2025 appeal, it cannot be said that application filed under section 115 of MPLRC was barred by time.
6. Under these circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by considering the reasoning assigned by the learned single Judge.
7. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA) (ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
(and)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ANAND
SHRIVASTAVA
Signing time: 08-01-2026
18:35:22