Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.85 seconds)
Documents citing S.Shivraj Reddy(Died) Thr His Lrs vs S. Raghuraj Reddy on 8 August, 2017

State Of Haryana And Others vs Ramesh Chand on 5 February, 2026

22. So far as the contention of respondent- in person that the plea of limitation was never taken by the appellants before the Civil Court is concerned, appellant-State has relied on judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.Shivraj Reddy(Died) Thr His Lrs and Another Vs. S. Raghuraj Reddy and Others, 2024 INSC 427, wherein, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even if plea of limitation is not set up as defence, Court has to dismiss the suit if it is barred by limitation.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S P Sharma - Full Document

Rajalakhsmi Ponnuvelu vs M.Kavitha on 26 September, 2025

11. The first relief is the main relief and other relieves are consequential reliefs. Therefore, the suit is barred by limitation. On careful perusal of the judgements relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is held in S.Shivraj Reddy (Died) thr his Lrs and Another Vs. S.Raghuraj Reddy and Others reported in 2024 SCC Online SC963 that the mandate of Section 3 of the Limitation Act is that it is the duty of the Court to dismiss any suit instituted after the prescribed period of limitation irrespective of the fact that the limitation has not been set up as a defence. When the limitation is the pure question of law and from the pleadings itself it becomes apparent that a suit is barred by limitation, then of course, it is the duty of the Court to decide limitation at the outset even in the absence of a plea.
Madras High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Principal Financial ... vs Bal Kishan Etc. on 17 April, 2026

11. Learned First Appellate Court accepted the appeal filed by respondents only on the ground that no issue was framed with respect to suit to be time barred and, therefore, learned trial Court could not dismiss the civil suit filed by the respondents on the ground of limitation. The same is not acceptable to this Court in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Shivraj Reddy(Died) through his LRs and another Vs. S. Raghuraj Reddy and others, 2024 INSC 427, wherein it is held that even if plea of limitation is not set up as defence, Court has to dismiss suit if it is barred by limitation.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S P Sharma - Full Document

M/S Haldiram Bhujia Wala vs M/S Bhawani Distributors on 12 December, 2025

4.19 It is further stated that findings of learned Arbitrator that respondent did not approach with clean hands and allowing claim of claimant is against the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter S Shivraj Reddy (Died) Thr His Lrs and Another Vs S. Raghuraj Rerddy and others, SLP (Civil) No (s). 4237 of 2015, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to decide that the question of limitation shall be decided by the court even though the said part or issue is not raised by the parties.
Delhi District Court Cites 58 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Chief Executive Officer Municipal ... vs Machindra Tryambak Gaikwad on 24 June, 2024

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondents/workmen whose status was also challenged by the Petitioner/Corporation had raised the claim of wages after a period of almost 13 years from 2004 onwards. It is his submission by relying upon judgments in case of S. Shivraj Reddy (died) through LRs and another vs. S. Raghuraj Reddy and others, 2024 DGLS(SC) 521, Rushibhai Jagdishbhai Pathak vs. Bhavnagar Muicipal Corporation, 2022 DGLS (SC) 587, Jaihind Sahakari Pani Purvatha Mandali -4- wp6050.24.odt Limited vs. Rajendra Bandu khot and others, 2019 DGLS(Bom) 1590 and Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) vs. BEST Jagrut Kamgar Sanghatana and others, 2023 DGLS(Bom) 2017 that the learned Industrial Court has committed error in granting payment of wages along with arrears for the entire period. It is his submission that in view of the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgments cited supra, arrears could have been granted at the most for the period of three years and not beyond that.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Chief Executive Officer Municipal ... vs Ratnabai Manohar Bamnikar on 24 June, 2024

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondents/workmen whose status was also challenged by the Petitioner/Corporation had raised the claim of wages after a period of almost 13 years from 2004 onwards. It is his submission by relying upon judgments in case of S. Shivraj Reddy (died) through LRs and another vs. S. Raghuraj Reddy and others, 2024 DGLS(SC) 521, Rushibhai Jagdishbhai Pathak vs. Bhavnagar Muicipal Corporation, 2022 DGLS (SC) 587, Jaihind Sahakari Pani Purvatha Mandali -4- wp6050.24.odt Limited vs. Rajendra Bandu khot and others, 2019 DGLS(Bom) 1590 and Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) vs. BEST Jagrut Kamgar Sanghatana and others, 2023 DGLS(Bom) 2017 that the learned Industrial Court has committed error in granting payment of wages along with arrears for the entire period. It is his submission that in view of the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgments cited supra, arrears could have been granted at the most for the period of three years and not beyond that.
Bombay High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next