Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Om Prakash vs Sashi Malpani on 22 April, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:17452]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 351/2023
Om Prakash S/o Shri Kanheyalal Ji Gehlot, Aged About 61 Years,
By Caste Nai, Resident Of Subhash Nagar, Bansawra, Tehsil And
District Banswara (Rajasthan).
----Appellant
Versus
1. Sashi Malpani W/o Shri Radheyshyam Malpani, By Caste
Maheshwari, Resident Of Hirabag Colony, Banswara,
Tehsil And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
2. Smt. Rita Patel W/o Shri Deepak Kumar Patel, By Caste
Kalaal, Resident Of Bhagat Singh Colony, Banswara, Tehsil
And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
3. Smt. Sangita Paliwal W/o Shri Surendra Paliwal, By Caste
Mahajan, Resident Of Hirabag Colony, Banswara, Tehsil
And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
4. Smt. Madhu Maheshwari W/o Shri Rajesh Maheshwari, By
Caste Maheshwari, Resident Of Commercial Colony,
Banswara, Tehsil And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
5. Rajesh Maheshwari S/o Shri Kanheyalal, By Caste
Maheshwari, Resident Of Commercial Colony, Banswara,
Tehsil And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
6. Bhagwati Lal Patel S/o Shri Gangaram Patel, By Caste
Kalaal, Resident Of Bhagat Singh Colony, Banswara, Tehsil
And District Banswara (Rajasthan).
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Trilokn Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arpit Bhoot
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Judgment Reserved on : 01/04/2025 Pronounced on : 22/04/2025
1. vihykFkhZ@oknh vkseizdk"k us flfoy izFke vihy varxZr /kkjk 96 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk vkseizdk"k cuke "kf"k ekyikuh o vU;] ewy nhokuh izdj.k la[;k (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (2 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] 01@2020 ¼CIS No. 01/2020½ esa ikfjr vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 5-8-2023 ls O;fFkr gksdj izLrqr dh gS ftlds }kjk fo}ku vij ftyk U;k;k/kh"k] ckalokMk us vihykFkhZ@oknh ds okn dks vuqPNsn 54 ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 ds varxZr ifjlhek vFkkZr fe;kn ls ckgj gksus ds vk/kkj ij vkns"k 7 fu;e 11 lifBr /kkjk 151 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk ds varxZr vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k gSA
2. vihykFkhZ@oknh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g rdZ jgk gS fd fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk o fof/k ds lqizfrikfnr fl)karksa ds fo#) tkdj vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 ikfjr fd;k gSA izR;FkhZx.k@ izfroknhx.k }kjk okn esa fyf[kr dFku vFkkZr tokcnkok izLrqr ugha fd;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa U;k;ky; dks dsoy ek= okn esa vafdr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij vfHkfu/kkZfjr djuk gS fd okn ifjlhek ds varxZr vkrk gS ;k ugha \ oknxzLr lEifRr ds laca/k esa vihykFkhZ@oknh o izR;[email protected] ds e/; fnukad 10-09-2015 dks tks foØ; vuqca/k i= fu'ikfnr fd;k x;k gS] mDr foØ; vuqca/k i= esa oknxzLr lEifÙk ls lacaf/kr laiw.kZ foØ; ewY; jkf"k fnukad 31-03-2016 dks vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk izR;[email protected] dks nh tkuh Fkh] ysfdu i{kdkjku esa ekSf[kd :i ls ;g r; gqvk Fkk fd vuqca/k esa fy[kh vof/k vafre vof/k u gksdj] nksuksa i{kksa dh lqfo/kk ls vko";drkuqlkj /kujkf"k ysdj vuqca/k dh ikyuk dj nh tk,xh vkSj jftLVªh djokrs le; vuqca/k esa dksbZ Hkh dher fu/kkZfjr dh x;h gks] ysfdu "kklu }kjk fu/kkZfjr xkbMykbu ds vuqlkj ,d&,d Hkw[k.M dh jftLVªh djokdj "ks'k Hkqxrku udn izkIr dj fy;k tk,xkA bl izdkj ls vuqca/k esa le; lhek dHkh vko";d "krZ ugha jgh gS tks bl ckr ls Li'V gS fd izR;[email protected] us vuqca/k esa fu/kkZfjr vof/k fnukad 31-03-2016 ds i"pkr~ fnukad 01-04-2016 dks vihykFkhZ@oknh ls nl yk[k #i;s izkIr fd;s vkSj fnukad 16-10-2016 dks vuqca/k vuqlkj 07 Hkw[k.M esa ls 02 Hkw[k.M Øe la[;k 04 vkSj 05 dk jftLVMZ foØ; i= vihykFkhZ@oknh ds i{k esa laikfnr djok;k rFkk dCtk fn;kA fnukad 11-10-2016 dks nl yk[k #i;s vkSj izkIr (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (3 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] fd;sA bl izdkj vihykFkhZ@oknh ,oa izR;[email protected] ds e/; fnukad 11-10-2016 rd dksbZ fookn ugha gqvkA vihykFkhZ@oknh ;g ekurk Fkk fd izR;[email protected] lqfo/kk vuqlkj #i;s ysdj cdk;k Hkkx dh jftLVªh djok nsxkA ml le; rd vihykFkhZ@oknh dks ;g tkudkjh ugha Fkh fd izR;[email protected] us vihykFkhZ@oknh ds lkFk /kks[kk/kMh dj xyr tkudkjh nsdj vuqca/k rLnhd djok;sA
3. vihykFkhZ@oknh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd dk ;g Hkh rdZ jgk gS fd tc izR;[email protected] us oknxzLr Hkwfe foØ; ds fy, crk;h] ml le; Hkw[k.M ds uD"ks esa if"peh fn"kk esa t;iqj&ckalokMk dh eq[; lMd crk;h vkSj mDr lMd Hkw[k.M ls 115 QhV dh nwjh crkdj [kqyh Hkwfe ds :i esa crk;h x;h gSA izR;[email protected] us ;g dgk fd mDr Hkw[k.M o lMd ds e/; vU; fdlh dh Hkh Hkwfe ugha gSA Hkw[k.M eq[; lMd ls yxk gksdj dherh gkssus ds vk/kkj ij vihykFkhZ@oknh us oknxzLr Hkw[k.M dk lkSnk fd;kA ml le; ml tehu ij ekSds ij ,d >ksiMh cuh gqbZ Fkh ftls izR;[email protected] us vius pkSdhnkj dh >ksiMh gksuk crkdj] >ksiMh gVk nsus dk fo"okl fnyk;kA ysfdu tc vihykFkhZ@oknh dks ;g tkudkjh gqbZ fd tks >ksiMh cuh gqbZ Fkh] og izR;[email protected] ds pkSdhnkj dh u gksdj] mDr Hkw[k.M ds vkxs cus Hkw[k.M ekfyd dh gS vkSj ekSds ij okLrfodrk esa Hkw[k.M ds lkeus ek= 10&15 QhV pkSMk jkLrk Hkw[k.M dh pkSMkbZ ds :i esa miyC/k gks ldrk gS D;ksafd "ks'k Hkwfe ij vU; O;fDr dk dCtk gSA bl rF; dks izR;[email protected] us vihykFkhZ@oknh ls fNikdj /kks[kk/kMh dh] bldk Kku gksus ij vihykFkhZ@oknh us fnukad 22-06-2018 dks izR;[email protected] ds fo#) /kks[kk/kMh djus ls laca/kh ,d iqfyl fjiksVZ iqfyl v/kh{kd] ckalokMk dks izLrqr dh] ftldk vuqla/kku py jgk gSA fnukad 22-06-2018 dks /kks[kk/kMh dh tkudkjh ds laca/k esa fjiksVZ ntZ djokus ls Bhd ,d ekg iwoZ bl /kks[kk/kMh dh tkudkjh gksus ij okn dkj.k mRiUu gqvk gS ftlds (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (4 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] vk/kkj ij okn ifjlhek vof/k esa okn i= ds iSjk la[;k 12 ds varxZr izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA okn ds leLr rF;ksa ij fopkj fd;s fcuk ljljh rkSj ij fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vihykFkhZ@oknh dk okn vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dj fn;kA oLrqr% okn dkj.k dc mRiUu gqvk \ ;g fof/k o rF; dk fefJe iz"u gS tks izkjafHkd dkuwuh fcanw ifjlhek ls lacaf/kr cukdj ;k nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; ysdj ;g r; fd;k tk ldrk gSA okn i= esa vafdr rF; ds vk/kkj ij vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk okn ifjlhek vof/k esa izLrqr gqvk gSA izR;[email protected] us tokc nkok vFkkZr~ fyf[kr dFku izLrqr ugha fd;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa fcuk fdlh U;k;ksfpr vk/kkj ds fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vihykFkhZ@oknh dk okn vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dj fn;k gSA vuqca/k foØ; i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa oknxzLr Hkw[k.M ds LoRo% laca/kh ;k ekSds laca/kh fookn gksus ij mldks fuiVus ds vkSj mlesa gksus okys [kpsZ dh tokcnkjh foØsrk dh gksuk crk;k x;k gSA >ksiMh dks izR;[email protected] }kjk ugha gVk;k x;k gS rFkk ekSds ij xyr rF;ksa dh tkudkjh izR;[email protected] }kjk nh x;hA bu rF;ksa ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us fopkj.k ugha dj] okn ljljh rkSj ij ifjlhek ls ckf/kr gksuk ekudj vLohdkj dj [kkfjt dj fn;k gSA
4. vihykFkhZ@oknh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g Hkh rdZ jgk gS fd vihykFkhZ@oknh us izR;[email protected] dks tfj;s vfHkHkk'kd fnukad 27-09-2019 dks ,d fof/kd uksfVl Hkh Hkstk gS ftlesa lHkh rjg ds fooknksa dk fuiVkjk dj 15 fnol esa vuqca/k dh ikyuk djus dk uksfVl fn;k gS ftldh ikyuk izR;[email protected] }kjk ugha dh x;hA mDr uksfVl fnukad 27-09-2019 ds 15 fnol i"pkr~ okn dkj.k mRiUu gksuk ekuk tkosa rks Hkh okn ifjlhek vof/k esa izLrqr gqvk gSA vr% vihykFkhZ@oknh dh vihy Lohdkj dh tkdj fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 dks vikLr fd;k tkdj okn iqu% uacj ij fy[kdj ifjlhek ls lacaf/kr izkjafHkd dkuwuh fcanw cukdj nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; fy;s tkus ds i"pkr~ mDr fcanw dks fu/kkZfjr djus dk fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (5 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] vkns"k fn;k tkosA vihykFkhZ@oknh ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd us vius rdZ ds leFkZu esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk G. NAGARAJ AND ANOTHER. Vs. B.P. MRUTHUNJAYANNA AND OTHERS (2023) 2 CivCC 551 esa ikfjr fofu"p; dks izLrqr fd;k gSA
5. izR;[email protected] ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd dk cgl ds nkSjku ;g rdZ jgk gS fd nksuksa i{kksa esa fnukad 10-09-2015 dks tks vuqca/k fu'ikfnr gqvk gS mlesa vuqca/k dh iwfrZ fnukad 31-03-2016 rd vihykFkhZ@oknh dks djuh FkhA ,slh fLFkfr esa fnukad 31-03-2016 ls 03 o'kZ dh vof/k esa fnukad 31-03-2019 rd okn izLrqr fd;k tkuk pkfg, Fkk tcfd vihykFkhZ@oknh us okn ifjlhek vof/k lekIr gksus ds 293 fnol ds i"pkr~ fnukad 18-01-2020 dks izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 54 ds izFke Hkkx ds vk/kkj ij okn ifjlhek vof/k ls ckgj lafLFkr gksus ds vk/kkj ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us okn dks lgh :i ls vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k gSA fofufnZ'V vuqrks'k vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 27 ds vuqlkj Hkh okn lafLFkr djus gsrq ifjlhek vuqca/k dh rkjh[k ls x.kuk dh tkrh gSA tgka fyf[kr esa vuqca/k gk]s ogka ekSf[kd :i ls vof/k fu/kkZfjr ugha dh tk ldrh gSA fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us fof/k esa of.kZr izko/kkuksa ds rgr lgh :i ls vihykFkhZ@oknh dk okn vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k gSA vr% vihykFkhZ@oknh dh vihy vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k tkosA izR;[email protected] ds fo}ku vfHkHkk'kd us vius rdksZa ds leFkZu esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk SABBIR (DEAD) THROUGH LRS Vs. ANJUMAN (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. CIVIL APPEAL No. 6075 OF 2023 esa ikfjr fofu"p; dks izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA
6. eSaus mHk; i{kksa ds rdksZa ij euu fd;kA i=koyh o fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 o izLrqr fofu"p;ksa dk voyksdu fd;kA
7. bl izdj.k esa fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa lafLFkr okn ds iSjk la[;k 01 esa of.kZr uki o prqFkZ lhek ds dqy 07 Hkw[k.M dks vihykFkhZ@oknh us (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (6 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] izR;[email protected] ls Ø; djus dk vuqca/k fnukad 10-09-2015 dks foØ; vuqca/k i= ds vuq:i fd;kA mDr foØ; vuqca/k i= ds vuq:i okn i= esa vafdr jkf"k vihykFkhZ@oknh us izR;[email protected] dks vnk dj nh vkSj 02 Hkw[k.M dk jftLVMZ foØ; i= okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij fu'ikfnr djok fn;kA vihykFkhZ@oknh ds vuqlkj fnukad 10-10-2016 rd nksuksa i{kksa esa dksbZ fookn ugha Fkk] ysfdu tc vihykFkhZ@oknh dks ;g irk pyk fd ekSds ij tks >ksiMhuqek lajpuk cuh gqbZ gS og txg izfroknhx.k ds pkSdhnkj dh u gksdj oknxzLr Hkw[k.M ds vkxs fLFkr Hkw[k.M ekfyd dh gS vkSj ekSds ij okLrfodrk esa Hkw[k.M ds lkeus ek= 15&20 QhV pkSMk jkLrk gh gSA Hkw[k.M dh pkSMkbZ ds :i esa miyC/k gks ldrk gSA Hkwfe ij vU; O;fDr;ksa dk dCtk gksuk o uD"ks esa vafdr rF;ksa dks izR;[email protected] }kjk fNik;k x;k o /kks[kk/kMh dh x;hA bl vk/kkj ij vihykFkhZ@oknh us izR;[email protected] ds fo#) ,d iqfyl fjiksVZ ckalokMk esa ntZ djok;h ftlds vk/kkj ij okn dkj.k mRiUu okn i= ds iSjk la[;k 12 esa crk;k x;k gSA
8. fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; esa vius vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd vuqca/k foØ; i= fnukad 10-09-2015 ds vuqlkj fnukad 31-03-2016 rd oknh dks izfroknhx.k ds oknxzLr Hkw[k.M dh laiw.kZ jkf"k vnk djuh Fkh tks jkf"k oknh }kjk vnk ugha dh x;hA fnukad 31-03-2016 dks okn dkj.k mRiUu gksus dh fnukad ls ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 54 ds izFke Hkkx ds vuq:i lafonk iwfrZ ds ekeys esa ifjlhek vof/k 03 o'kZ gksus ds vk/kkj ij fnukad 31-03-2019 rd okn i= izLrqr djuk pkfg, FkkA izfroknh dh vksj ls okn fnukad 05-11-2019 dks okn dkj.k ls 03 o'kZ i"pkr~ izLrqr fd;k gSA blds vfrfjDr fof/kd uksfVl dh vof/k 15 fnol ifjlhek vof/k esa ?kVk nh tkos rks Hkh oknh dks fnukad 21-10-2019 rd okn U;k;ky; esa izLrqr djuk pkfg, Fkk] fdarq okn U;k;ky; esa fnukad 18-11-2019 ifjlhek vof/k ds ckn izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (7 of 14) [CFA-351/2023]
9. bl izdj.k esa vihykFkhZ@oknh dh vksj ls okn fnukad 05-11-201+9 dks izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA fnukad 18-11-2019 dks izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA blds vfrfjDr ;gka ;g dguk U;k;ksfpr gksxk fd bl izdj.k esa izR;[email protected] dh vksj ls fyf[kr dFku vFkkZr tokc nkok izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij U;k;ky; dks ;g vo/kkfjr djuk gksrk gS fd okn ifjlhek vof/k esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ;k ugha \ The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sri Biswanath Banik and Anr. Vs. Smt. Sulagna Bose and Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 1848 of 2022], while deciding the matter on the issue of limitation, held that a plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC by reading only few lines/passages, and the entire plaint averments must be considered to determine whether the suit is barred by limitation. The Hon'ble court in the respective paras stated that:
"7. Now, so far as the issue whether the suit can be said to be barred by limitation or not, at this stage, what is required to be considered is the averments in the plaint. Only in a case where on the face of it, it is seen that the suit is barred by limitation, then and then only a plaint can be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC on the ground of limitation. At this stage what is required to be considered is the averments in the plaint. For the aforesaid purpose, the Court has to consider and read the averments in the plaint as a whole. As observed and held by this Court in the case of Ram Prakash Gupta (supra), rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) CPC by reading only few lines and passages and ignoring the other relevant parts of the plaint is impermissible. In the said decision, in paragraph 21, it is observed and held as under:-
"21. As observed earlier, before passing an order in an application filed for rejection of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d), it is but proper to verify the entire plaint averments. The abovementioned materials clearly show that the decree passed in Suit No. 183 of 1974 came to the knowledge of the plaintiff in the year 1986, when Suit No. 424 of 1989 titled Assema Architect v. Ram Prakash was filed in which a copy of the earlier decree was placed on record and thereafter he took steps at the earliest and filed the suit for declaration and in the alternative for possession. It is not in dispute that as per Article 59 of the Limitation Act, 1963, a suit ought to have been filed within a period of three years from the date of the knowledge. The knowledge mentioned in the plaint cannot be termed as inadequate and incomplete as observed by the High Court. While deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11, few lines or passage should not be read in isolation and the pleadings have to be read as a whole to ascertain its true import. We are of the view that both the (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (8 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] trial court as well as the High Court failed to advert to the relevant averments as stated in the plaint."
7.1 From the aforesaid decision and even otherwise as held by this Court in a catena of decisions, while considering an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the Court has to go through the entire plaint averments and cannot reject the plaint by reading only few lines/passages and ignoring the other relevant parts of the plaint."
10. mijksDr fofu"p; esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)kar dks n`f'Vxr djs rks ;g Li'V gS fd izR;[email protected] dh vksj ls ;g dksbZ fyf[kr dFku@tokc nkok izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa ij U;k;ky; dks fopkj fd;k tkuk gksrk gSA foØ; vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 ds vuqlkj oknxzzLr Hkw[k.M dh "ks'k laiw.kZ foØ; ewy jkf"k fnukad 31-03-2016 rd vihykFkhZ@oknh dks izR;[email protected] dks nh tkuh pkfg, Fkh tks vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk ugha nh x;hA bl laca/k esa vihykFkhZ@oknh us okn i= esa ;g rF; vafdr fd;k gS fd vuqca/k ds vuqlkj "ks'k /kujkf"k vnk djus ds fy, vof/k fu/kkZfjr dh x;h Fkh] ysfdu okLrfod :i ls vuqca/k esa nksuksa i{kksa ds e/; le; lhek dHkh Hkh vuqca/k dh iwfrZ ds fy, vko";d "krZ ugha FkhA iqjkus laca/kksa dks /;ku esa j[kdj vko";drk vuqlkj dHkh Hkh cdk;k jde ysdj jftLVªh djokus dk ekSf[kd :i ls r; gks x;k Fkk vkSj blh vk/kkj ij vuqca/k esa crk;h x;h vof/k fnukad 31-03-2016 ds i"pkr~ izR;[email protected] us fnukad 01-04-2016 dks oknh ls nl yk[k #i;s izkIr fd;s vkSj fnukad 06-10-2016 dks vuqca/k esa crk;s vuqlkj 07 Hkw[k.M esa ls 02 Hkw[k.M Øe la[;k 04 o 05 dk jftLVMZ foØ; i= laikfnr djk;k o dCtk fn;k vkSj fnukad 11-10-2016 dks nl yk[k #i;s vkSj izkIr fd;sA ,slh fLFkfr esa okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij ;g izFken`'V;k Li'V gksrk gS fd izR;[email protected] us foØ; vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa fu/kkZfjr dh x;h frfFk 31-03-2016 ds i"pkr~ Hkh foØ; jkf"k izkIr dh gS vkSj oknxzLr Hkw[k.M esa ls nksuksa Hkw[k.Mksa dk jftLVMZ foØ; i= fu'ikfnr djok;k gSA ,slh fLFkfr esa izFken`'V;k bl rF;ksa dks (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (9 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] ekuk tk ldrk gS fd izR;[email protected] us vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa fu/kkZfjr vof/k ds i"pkr Hkh vkilh lgefr ls vuqca/k esa of.kZr "krksZa dks vkxs vof/k rd c<k;s tkus gsrq ikjLifjd lgefr nh x;hA izR;FkhZx.k@ izfroknhx.k us ikjLifjd lgefr nh ;k ugha nh] dSls o fdu ifjfLFkfr esa fnukad 31-03-2016 ds i"pkr Hkw[k.Mksa dh jkf"k izkIr dh vkSj nks Hkw[k.Mksa dk foØ; i= jftLVMZ djok;kA ;g rF; lk{; dh fo'k;oLrq gS ftldk vo/kkj.k nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; izLrqr gksus ds i"pkr xq.kkoxq.kksa ij fu/kkZfjr fd;k tk ldrk gSA blh izdkj vihykFkhZ@oknh dk okn i= esa ;g dFku gS fd foØ; vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa Hkw[k.M ds LoRo% laca/kh ekSds laca/kh fookn gksus ij fuiVkus dh tokcnkjh izR;[email protected] dh FkhA vihykFkhZ@oknh us okn i= esa vafdr fd;k gS fd tks Hkw[k.M izR;[email protected] us foØ; fd;s x;s] mDr Hkw[k.M dh if"pe fn"kk esa 115 QhV nwjh rFkk t;iqj&ckalokMk dh eq[; lMd crk;h x;h Fkh vkSj ;g crk;k x;k Fkk fd Hkw[k.M o lMd ds e/; fdlh vU; dh Hkwfe ugha gS] ysfdu tgka >ksiMh Fkh tks izR;[email protected] us viuh crk;h Fkh tcfd og vU; Hkw[k.M ekfyd dh FkhA bu rF;ksa dks izR;[email protected] us fNik;k vkSj vuqca/k i= fu'ikfnr djok;kA bl /kks[kk/kMh ds laca/k esa vihykFkhZ@oknh us fnukad 22-06-2018 dks iqfyl fjiksVZ ntZ djokuk okn i= esa crk;k gS vkSj okn i= ds iSjk la[;k 12 esa ;g dgk gS fd mDr iqfyl fjiksVZ fnukad 22-06-2018 ls ,d ekg iwoZ /kks[kk/kMh ds dkj.kksa ls okn dkj.k mRiUu gqvk gS blfy, okn fe;kn vof/k esa gSA oLrqr% ifjlhek vof/k ds fu/kkZj.k gsrq okn dkj.k eq[; gksrk gSA okn dkj.k vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa vafdr fnukad 31-03-2016 ls mRiUu gqvk ;k fnukad 22-06-2018 dks vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk iqfyl fjiksVZ ntZ djokus ls ,d ekg iwoZ mRiUu gqvk ;k vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk izR;[email protected] dks vius vf/koDrk ds ek/;e ls fnukad 27-09-2015 dks iathc) uksfVl Hksts tkus ds i"pkr mRiUu (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (10 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] gqvkA ;g leLr rF; lk{; dh fo'k;oLrq gS ftldh vo/kkj.k nksuksa i{kksa ds lk{; ds i"pkr xq.kkoxq.kksa ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk fd;k tk ldrk gSA The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad and Ors [2023 SCCOnline SC 256] as to when cause of action shall arise held that :
"57. ....... Cause of action should also be distinguished from 'remedy'`which is the means or method whereby the cause of action or corresponding obligation is effectuated and by which a wrong is redressed and relief obtained. The one precedes and gives rise to the other, but they are separate and distinct from each other and are governed by different rules and principles. The cause of action is the obligation from which springs the "action", defined as the right to enforce an obligation, A cause of action arises when that which ought to have been done is not done or that which ought not to have been done is done. The essential elements of a cause of action are thus the existence of a legal right in the plaintiff with a corresponding legal duty in the defendant, and a violation or breach of that 'right or duty' with consequential injury or damage to the plaintiff for which he may maintain an action for appropriate relief or reliefs. The right to maintain an action depends upon the existence of a cause of action which Involves a combination of a right on the part of the plaintiff and the violation of such right by the defendant. The duty on the part of the defendant may arise from a contract or may be imposed by positive law independent of contract, it may arise of contractus or ex delicto. A cause of action arises from the invasion of the plaintiff's right by violation of some duty Imposed upon the defendant in favour of the plaintiff either by voluntary contract or by positive law. (See : Sardar Balbir Singh v. Atma Ram Srivastava reported in AIR 1977 All 211 (FB))"
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S. Brahmanand & Ors. Vs. K.R. Muthugopal and Ors [2005 (7) Supreme 361] as to whether the written agreement is necessary for mutual extension of contract held that :
"36. Thus, this was a situation where the original agreement of 10.3.1989 had a "fixed date" for performance, but by the subsequent letter of 18.6.1992 the Defendants made a request for postponing the performance to a future date without fixing any further date for performance. This was accepted by the Plaintiffs by their act of forbearance and not insisting on performance forthwith. There is nothing strange in time for performance being extended, even though originally the agreement had a fixed date. Section 63 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides that every promisee may extend time for the performance of the contract. Such an (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (11 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] agreement to extend time need not necessarily be reduced to writing, but may be proved by oral evidence or in some cases, even by evidence of conduct including forbearance on the part of the other party.14 Thus, in this case there was a variation in the date of performance by express representation by the Defendants, agreed to by the act of forbearance on the part of the Plaintiffs. What was originally covered by the first part of Article 54, now fell within the purview of the second part of the Article. Pazhaniappa Chettiyar v. South Indian Planting and Industrial Co. Ltd. and Anr.15 was a similar instance where the contract when initially made had a date fixed for the performance of the contract but the Court was of the view that "in the events that happened in this case, the agreement in question though started with fixation of a period for the completion of the transaction became one without such period on account of the peculiar facts and circumstances already explained and the contract, therefore, became one in which no time fixed for its performance." and held that was originally covered by the first part of Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1908 would fall under the second part of the said Article because of the supervening circumstances of the case."
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh B. Desai and Ors. Vs. Bipin Vadilal Mehta and Ors [(2006) 5 SCC 638] held that the limitation is a mixed question of fact and law, the court in its judgement stated that:
"19. A plea of limitation cannot be decided as an abstract principle of law divorced from facts as in every case the starting point of limitation has to be ascertained which is entirely a question of fact. A plea of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact. The question whether the words "barred by law" occurring in Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC would also include the ground that it is barred by law of limitation has been recently considered by a two-Judge Bench of this Court to which one of us was a member (Ashok Bhan, J.) in Balasaria Construction (P) Ltd. v. Hanuman Seva Trust! (2006) 5 SCC 658) it was held: (SCC p. 661, para 8) "8. After hearing counsel for the parties, going through the plaint, application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC and the judgments of the trial court and the High Court, we are of the opinion that the present suit could not be dismissed as barred by limitation without proper pleadings, framing of an issue of limitation and taking of evidence. Question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact. Ex facie in the present case on the reading of the plaint it cannot be held that the suit is barred by time."
This principle would be equally applicable to a company petition. Therefore, unless it becomes apparent from the reading of the company petition that the same is barred by (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (12 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] limitation the petition cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC."
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Salim D Agboatwala and Ors. Vs. Shamalji Oddhavji Thakkar and Ors. [(2021) 17 SCC 100], while deciding the matter, held that the question of limitation is a mixed question of fact and law, and when the plaintiffs assert that they gained knowledge of the cause of action only at a specific time, it becomes a triable issue. The court held that:
"8. Insofar as the rejection of the plaint on the ground of limitation is concerned, it is needless to emphasise that limitation is a mixed question of fact and law. It is the case of the appellant plaintiffs that only after making inspection of the records in connection with the suit land available in the office of Defendant 3 (Court Receiver) that they came across the correspondence and documents relating to the transactions and that the proceedings before ALT were collusive, fraudulent and null and void. The appellant-plaintiffs have even questioned the authority of the Court Receiver to represent them in the tenancy proceedings.
9. .......
10. We are not dealing here with a case where notices were ordered to be issued, but were not or could not, be served on necessary and proper parties. We are dealing with a case where the plaintiffs assert in no uncertain terms that notices were never ordered to them nor served on them. Therefore, the answer to the issue regarding limitation, will depend upon the evidence with regard to the issuance and service of notice and the knowledge of the plaintiffs. Hence, the trial court as well as the High Court were not right in rejecting the plaint on the ground of limitation, especially in the facts and circumstances of this case.
11. As observed by this Court in P.V. Guru Raj Reddy v. P. Neeradha Reddyl, the rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 is a drastic power conferred on the court to terminate a civil action at the threshold. Therefore, the conditions precedent to the exercise of the power are stringent and it is especially so when rejection of plaint is sought on the ground of limitation. When a plaintiff claims that he gained knowledge of the essential facts giving rise to the cause of action only at a particular point of time, the same has to be accepted at the stage of considering the application under Order 7 Rule 11.
12. Again as pointed out by a three-Judge Bench of this Court in Chhotanben v. Kiritbhai Jalkrushnabhai Thakkar [(2018) 6 SCC 422], the plea regarding the date on which the plaintiffs gained knowledge of the essential facts, is crucial for deciding the question whether the suit is barred by limitation or not. It (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (13 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] becomes a triable issue and hence the suit cannot be thrown out at the threshold."
11. mijksDr fofu"p;ksa esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)karksa dks n`f'Vxr j[krs gq, tgka fyf[kr dFku rFkk tokc nkok izLrqr ugha gqvk gks] ogka okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa dks ifjlhek vof/k dk fopkj.k djus gsrq U;k;ky; dks ns[kuk gksrk gS] ysfdu okn i= vafdr rF;ksa dh foospuk ifjlhek vof/k dk fu/kkZj.k djus gsrq fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vius vkyksP; vkns"k esa ugha fd;sA vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa of.kZr vof/k fnukad 31-03-2016 ds i"pkr i{kdkjksa us ekSf[kd lgefr o djkj ds vk/kkj ij mDr vof/k dh vfHko`f) dh ;k ugha dh \ bl rF; dks Hkh fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vius vkyksP; vkns"k esa foosfpr ugha fd;k gSA oLrqr% bl izdj.k esa okn dkj.k dc mRiUu gqvk \ ;g eq[; iz"u gSA okn dkj.k vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa vafdr vof/k fnukad 31-03-2016 ls mRiUu gqvk( vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk izR;FkhZx.k@ izfroknhx.k dks fn;s x;s uksfVl dh fnukad ls mRiUu gqvk] vFkok ;g vihykFkhZ@oknh }kjk izR;[email protected] ds fo#) ntZ djk;h x;h iqfyl fjiksVZ djus ls mRiUu gqvk gSA bu leLr rF;ksa ds laca/k esa foLr`r foospuk fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; us vius vkyksP; vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 esa ugha fd;k gSA vuqca/k i= fnukad 10-09-2015 esa vafdr fnukad 31-03-2016 dks okn dkj.k ekurs gq, /kkjk 54 ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 ds izFke Hkkx ds rgr okn 03 o'kZ dh vof/k esa izLrqr ugha fd;s tkus ds vk/kkj ij mijksDr fofu"p;ksa esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)karksa dks n`f'Vxr j[krs gq, ljljh rkSj ij ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 ds vk/kkj ij okn vkns"k 7 ds fu;e 11 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk esa of.kZr vk/kkj ij vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k tkuk U;k;laxr mfpr izrhr ugha gksrk gSA okn i= esa vafdr rF;ksa ds vk/kkj ij ifjlhek vof/k dc ls ykxw gksxhA okn dkj.k izdj.k esa dc ls mRiUu gqvk gS \ ;g rF; fof/k o rF; dk fefJr iz"u gS ftldk fu/kkZj.k nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; ds i"pkr xq.kkoxq.kksa ij fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k tk ldrk gSA bl izdj.k esa ifjlhek vof/k esa okn lafLFkr gqvk gS ;k ugha] blds laca/k esa (Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) [2025:RJ-JD:17452] (14 of 14) [CFA-351/2023] izR;[email protected] dks Hkh lk{; izLrqr djus dk volj izkIr gksxkA blls muds fgrksa ij dksbZ foijhr izHkko ugha iMrk gSA vr% mijksDr foospu o mijksDr fofu"p; esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fl)karksa dks n`f'Vxr j[krs gq, vihykFkhZ vkseizdk"k dh vihy varxZr /kkjk 96 ds varxZr vkns"kkuqlkj Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; gSA
12. vihykFkhZ vkseizdk"k iq= dUgS;kyky dh flfoy izFke vihy Lohdkj dh tkdj fo}ku vij ftyk U;k;k/kh"k] ckalokMk }kjk ewy nhokuh izdj.k la[;k 01@2020 esa ikfjr vkns"k fnukad 05-08-2023 varxZr vkns"k 7 fu;e 11 lifBr /kkjk 151 flfoy izfØ;k lafgrk vikLr fd;k tkdj fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; dks ;g vknsf"kr fd;k tkrk gS fd og ewy okn dks iqu% ewy uacj ij lafLFkr dj fof/kuqlkj ifjlhek ds fcUnw dks r; dj] fof/klEer vkns"k ikfjr djsA
13. mijksDr vkns"k esa fd;k x;k dksbZ Hkh er fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk ifjlhek fcUnw dks fofu"p; fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa dksbZ foijhr izHkko ugha j[ksxkA fopkj.k U;k;ky; dh i=koyh ykSVkbZ tkosA (CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J Dhanraj/-
(Downloaded on 23/04/2025 at 10:06:21 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)