When a document is valid, no question arises of its cancellation. When a document is void ab initio, a decree for setting aside the same would not be necessary
Prem Singh v. Birbal and Others
[(2006) 5 SCC 353] wherein this Court held:
"16. When a document is valid, no question arises of its cancellation. When a document is void ab initio, a decree for setting aside the same would not be necessary as the same is non est in the eye of the law, as it would be a nullity."
citation
Civil Appeal No. 2412 of 2006 in Civil Second Appeal No. 8 of 1998
Parties
Prem Singh & Others Versus Birbal & Others
Date Of Decision
02-05-2006
Judges
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.B. SINHA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN
Appearing Advocates
For the Appellant: M/s. S.K. Gambhir, Sr.
Advocate, H.K. Puri, Ujjwal Banerjee, Priya Puri, V.M. Chauhan,
Advocates. For the Respondents: M/s. Naresh Kaushik, Shilpa Chouhan,
S.C. Gupta, D.K. Sharma, Lalita Kaushik, Advocates.
Court
Supreme Court of India
Head Note
Limitation Act, 1963- Section 27 & Article 59 -
Civil Procedure Code,1908-
Specific Relief Act-Section 31-
Constitution of India-Article 136-Suit for Declaration and Partition-Suit Property was Sold When the Plaintiff was Minor-Trial Court Decreed the Suit that it Was Barred by Limitation-Lower Appellate Court Held that Sale Deed was Executed by Playing Fraud on the Plaintiff-Declared the Sale Deed as Void ab Intio-Second Appeal filed by the Appellant was Dismissed- Whether Suit is Barred by Limitation-On Appeal-Held-Plaintiff Neither Filed Suit Within 12 years nor filed Within 3 years of Attaining Majority-Suit Barred by Limitation-Findings of the Trial Court Confirmed-If a deed was executed by the plaintiff when he was a minor and it was void, he had two options to file a suit to get the property purportedly conveyed thereunder. He could either file the suit within 12 years of the deed or within 3 years of attaining majority. Here, the plaintiff did not either sue within 12 years of the deed or within 3 years of attaining majority. Therefore, the suit was rightly held to be barred by limitation by the trial court-Since the lower Appellate Court and the High Court were not right in law in holding that the suit was not barred by limitation, the judgments and decrees of the lower Appellate Court and that of the High Court are liable to be set aside and dismissal of the suit by the trial court on the ground that it is barred by limitation is liable to be restored.
Para 26 & 27
Cases Referred:
1. Balvant N. Viswamitra & Ors. v. Yadav Sadashiv Mule (Dead) through LRs. & Ors., V (2004) SLT 136=(2004) 8 SCC 706. (Referred & Discussed) [Para 6]
2. Unni & Anr. v. Kunchi Amma & Ors., (1891) ILR XIV Mad. 26. (Relied) [Para 18]
3. Sheo Shankar Gir v. Ram Shewak Chowdhri & Ors., (1897) ILR XXIV Cal. 77. (Relied) [Para 18]
4. Ningawwa v. Byrappa Shiddappa Hireknrabnar & Ors., AIR 1968 SC 956. (Relied) [Para 22]
5. Ponnamma Pillai Indira Pillai v. Padmanabhan Channar Kesavan Channar & Ors., 1968 KLT 673=AIR 1969 Ker. 163. (Relied) [Para 24]
6. P.C.K. Muthia Chettiar & Ors. v. V.E.S. Shanmugham Chettiar (dead) & Anr., AIR 1969 SC 552. (Relied) [Para 25]
7. Sounder (Executrix of the Will of Rose Maud Gallie, Deceased) v. Anglia Building Society, (1971) 1 AC 1004. (Relied) [Para 25]
Comparative Citations:
2006 (5) SCJ 802, 2006 (5) SCC 353, 2006 AIR(SC) 3608, 2006 AIR(SCW) 3595, 2006 (6) BCR 332, 2006 (2) KLT 863, 2006 (3) MLJ 37, 2006 (5) MAH.L.J 441, 2006 (4) Supreme 69, 2006 (5) Scale 191, 2006 (3) MLJ 37, 2006 (2) CCC 247, 2006 (6) SRJ 311, 2006 (1) CLR 751, 2007 (1) LW 873, 2006 (2) CLT 189, 2006 (3) SLT 691
Civil Procedure Code,1908-
Specific Relief Act-Section 31-
Constitution of India-Article 136-Suit for Declaration and Partition-Suit Property was Sold When the Plaintiff was Minor-Trial Court Decreed the Suit that it Was Barred by Limitation-Lower Appellate Court Held that Sale Deed was Executed by Playing Fraud on the Plaintiff-Declared the Sale Deed as Void ab Intio-Second Appeal filed by the Appellant was Dismissed- Whether Suit is Barred by Limitation-On Appeal-Held-Plaintiff Neither Filed Suit Within 12 years nor filed Within 3 years of Attaining Majority-Suit Barred by Limitation-Findings of the Trial Court Confirmed-If a deed was executed by the plaintiff when he was a minor and it was void, he had two options to file a suit to get the property purportedly conveyed thereunder. He could either file the suit within 12 years of the deed or within 3 years of attaining majority. Here, the plaintiff did not either sue within 12 years of the deed or within 3 years of attaining majority. Therefore, the suit was rightly held to be barred by limitation by the trial court-Since the lower Appellate Court and the High Court were not right in law in holding that the suit was not barred by limitation, the judgments and decrees of the lower Appellate Court and that of the High Court are liable to be set aside and dismissal of the suit by the trial court on the ground that it is barred by limitation is liable to be restored.
Para 26 & 27
Cases Referred:
1. Balvant N. Viswamitra & Ors. v. Yadav Sadashiv Mule (Dead) through LRs. & Ors., V (2004) SLT 136=(2004) 8 SCC 706. (Referred & Discussed) [Para 6]
2. Unni & Anr. v. Kunchi Amma & Ors., (1891) ILR XIV Mad. 26. (Relied) [Para 18]
3. Sheo Shankar Gir v. Ram Shewak Chowdhri & Ors., (1897) ILR XXIV Cal. 77. (Relied) [Para 18]
4. Ningawwa v. Byrappa Shiddappa Hireknrabnar & Ors., AIR 1968 SC 956. (Relied) [Para 22]
5. Ponnamma Pillai Indira Pillai v. Padmanabhan Channar Kesavan Channar & Ors., 1968 KLT 673=AIR 1969 Ker. 163. (Relied) [Para 24]
6. P.C.K. Muthia Chettiar & Ors. v. V.E.S. Shanmugham Chettiar (dead) & Anr., AIR 1969 SC 552. (Relied) [Para 25]
7. Sounder (Executrix of the Will of Rose Maud Gallie, Deceased) v. Anglia Building Society, (1971) 1 AC 1004. (Relied) [Para 25]
Comparative Citations:
2006 (5) SCJ 802, 2006 (5) SCC 353, 2006 AIR(SC) 3608, 2006 AIR(SCW) 3595, 2006 (6) BCR 332, 2006 (2) KLT 863, 2006 (3) MLJ 37, 2006 (5) MAH.L.J 441, 2006 (4) Supreme 69, 2006 (5) Scale 191, 2006 (3) MLJ 37, 2006 (2) CCC 247, 2006 (6) SRJ 311, 2006 (1) CLR 751, 2007 (1) LW 873, 2006 (2) CLT 189, 2006 (3) SLT 691
Comments
Post a Comment