Limitation Archives - Page 9 of 10 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

January 17, 2026 7:50 am

Cognizance–Taking of–Bar of Limitation–The relevant date for deciding whether the complaint is barred by limitation is the date of the filing of complaint and not issuance of process or taking of cognizance by Court.

Sep 21, 2017 sclaw

2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3960 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice C.K. Thakker The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee Criminal Appeal No. 942 of 2007…

Limitation

Declaratory Suit–Adverse Possession–Limitation–Suit decreed by Courts below–High Court reversed the suit on basis of question of limitation only–Matter remanded to decide both the questions.

Sep 1, 2017 sclaw

2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3744 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 6616 of…

Limitation

Declaratory suit–Limitation would not commence unless there has been a clear and unequivocal threat to the right claimed by the plaintiff.

Aug 30, 2017 sclaw

2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3714 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harjit Singh Bedi Civil Appeal No. 4803 of…

Limitation

Property Tax–Determination of–Date of order made–Not correct that the date of the order ‘made’ in terms of Section 126(4) of the Act should be taken to be the date when the same was communicated to the assessee and not the one when it was signed.

Jul 31, 2017 sclaw

2007(5) LAW HERALD (SC) 3506 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harjit Singh Bedi Civil Appeal No. 3303 of…

Limitation

Limitation—Exclusion of Time—Both due diligence and good faith must be established. Limitation—Exclusion of Time—Nothing shall be deemed to be done in good faith which is not done with due care and attention.

Jun 1, 2017 sclaw

2016(5) Law Herald (P&H) 3748 (SC) : 2016 LawHerald.Org 2355 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Fali…

Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Article 137 – Limitation – Suit for distribution of property – Limitation of three years commences when right to apply accrues – Last communication made on 29-9-1989 – Suit filed on 8-5-1992 within time.

May 27, 2017 sclaw

AIR 2006 SC 2488 : (2006) 2 ARBLR 1 : (2006) 2 CTC 597 : (2006) 4 JT 251 : (2006) 4 SCALE 74 : (2006) 4 SCC 658…

Limitation

Exparte decree—Setting aside of–Limitation will begin from the date of knowledge of passing of the said exparte decree. Summons–It is obligatory on the part of the Court to send a copy of the plaint and other documents appended thereto, in terms of order 5, Rule 2 CPC

Apr 16, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1816 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 714 of…

Limitation

Declaratory decree—Limitation—Where no proceeding is initiated under Order XII R. 9 (2) CPC the abatement culminates into finally and gives a new starting point for the period of limitation.

Apr 15, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1837 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 2370 of…

Limitation

Adverse Possession—Adverse possession is a right which comes into play not just because someone loses his right to reclaim the property out of continuous and willful neglect but also on account of possessor’s positive intent to dispossess.

Apr 14, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1655 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 7062 of…

Limitation

Adverse Possession— Once the plaintiff proves his title, the burden shifts to the defendant to establish that he has perfected his title by adverse possession.

Apr 12, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1452 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 6195 of 2000…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9(2) read with Rule 9(4) of 2001 Rules — Setting aside High Court judgment — High Court erroneously treated the date of filing of the Section 11 petition (28.06.2024) as the commencement date, leading to the conclusion that proceedings commenced beyond the statutory period — Where the arbitration notice was served (on 11.04.2024) well within the 90-day period from the ad-interim injunction order (17.02.2024), proceedings commenced in time as per Section 21 — High Court’s finding unsustainable, resulting in the restoration of the Trial Court’s initial ad-interim injunction order. (Paras 28, 31, 32) E. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim injunction — Dispute regarding existence

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Corporate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of “motor vehicle” — Components — Definition has two parts: an inclusive part (mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads) and an exclusive part — The second part expressly excludes “a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises” — Although Dumpers, Loaders, etc., may fall under the first part of the definition, they are excluded if their nature of use is confined to factory or enclosed premises, being special type vehicles/Construction Equipment Vehicles. (Paras 36, 37, 38, 39)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw

Category: Limitation

You missed