Babasaheb T. Jadhav & Anr. v. Mangal M. Yadav & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R M SAVANT
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. Surel S. Shah, for the Applicants. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : OCTOBER 19, 2012. P. C.: 1 The revisionary jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 28.09.2012 by which order the application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed by the Applicants herein came to be rejected. 2 The said application was filed by the Applicants herein who are the Defendants in Special Civil Suit No.106 of 2012 on the ground that the Suit does not disclose a cause of action, that the Suit is not properly valued and no proper Court fees are paid and that the Suit is filed beyond limitation. Insofar as the valuation of the Suit and proper Court fees being paid thereon the Trial Court has observed in the impugned Aswale 1/3
846.12.cra order that the said issue would be considered along with Exhibit56. Insofar as the issue that the suit does not disclose the cause of action, the learned counsel for the Applicants fairly states that he is not pressing the said issue. The issue which now remains for consideration is as to whether the Suit is filed beyond limitation. 3 It is the case of the Defendants that the challenge in the Suit is to the sale deed dated 08.09.2008 to which the Plaintiffs themselves are the parties and therefore the Suit as filed in the year 2012 is exfacie beyond limitation. On the other hand, it is the case of the Plaintiffs that on realizing that the sale deed had been executed by the Defendants by misrepresentation and fraud which the Plaintiffs have realized later on that the Suit in question has been filed. The Trial Court in the said fact situation has held that in view of the respective assertion of the parties the issue of limitation in the instant case is a mixed question of law and fact and would therefore, have to be adjudicated after a full scale trial. 4 As indicated above, insofar as the issue of valuation and Court fees is concerned, the same is to be decided along with Exhibit56. In my view, the reasons mentioned by the Trial Court for getting the said issue of limitation being adjudicated at the trial, in the facts and circumstances Aswale 2/3
846.12.cra of the present case cannot be faulted with. Hence no case for interference is made out. The Civil Revision Application is accordingly dismissed. However, it will be open for the Applicants to apply to the Trial Court to try the said issue of limitation before the other issues are tried in the Suit. ( R. M. SAVANT, J.) Aswale 3/3
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.