Lapse Of Limitation Bars Remedy But Does Not Extinguish Title, SC Holds

The Supreme Court of India recently reiterated that the lapse of limitation barred only the remedy but did not extinguish the title. The Court referred to Section 27 of the Limitation Act.

Bench comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Sanjay Karol heard a case wherein the dispute was in the year 1947, when a mother transferred property inherited at the death of her husband, in one form to her two sons and in another, to her daughter. Some forty-odd years later, the daughter’s husband filed a suit in respect of such property, in 1993. 

The Additional District Munsiff decided the matter in 1999. The Additional District and Session Judge returned a decision on the First Appeal in 2002. The Second Appeal was decided by the High Court in 2012. It is against this order and judgment in Second Appeal that the instant civil appeal had been preferred. 

On the issue of limitation, the Court held that the cause of action to seek declaration should have arisen only in the year 1990.

The Court observed that, "There was nothing on record to show any cause of action having arisen at this point in time."

Further, the Court held, that there was no attempt made by the original plaintiff to amend the plaint to seek the relief of recovery of possession.

"It is settled law that amendment of a plaint can be made at any stage of a suit, even at the second appellate stage," the Court observed.

The appeal was allowed and the impugned judgment was set aside by the Court.