Case Note & Summary
The plaintiffs, Raishi S. Chheda and others, filed a suit for partition and accounts against the defendants, Dhirajlal R. Chheda and others, in the Bombay High Court. The suit pertained to immovable property situated in Gujarat. The defendants filed a Notice of Motion for striking off the plaint and dismissing the suit as barred by limitation and lack of jurisdiction. The motion was dismissed by a learned Single Judge, but on appeal, the Appeal Court directed that the issues of limitation and jurisdiction be tried as preliminary issues under Order XIV Rule 2 of the CPC. The court framed two issues: whether the court has jurisdiction and whether the suit is barred by limitation. The plaintiffs claimed that the cause of action arose in 1972 when they were excluded from the property, but they filed the suit in 2002, after 30 years. The court held that the suit is barred by limitation under Articles 65 and 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as the plaintiffs failed to file the suit within the prescribed period. Additionally, the court held that it lacks territorial jurisdiction as the property is situated in Gujarat and the defendants reside there. The court dismissed the suit with costs.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Suit for Partition - Bar of Limitation - Articles 65 and 113 of Limitation Act, 1963 - The suit for partition and accounts was filed after 30 years from the date of cause of action, which arose in 1972 when the plaintiffs were allegedly excluded from the property. The court held that the suit is clearly barred by limitation as the plaintiffs failed to file the suit within 12 years under Article 65 or within 3 years under Article 113 from the date of knowledge of exclusion. (Paras 1-13) B) Civil Procedure Code - Preliminary Issue - Order XIV Rule 2 of CPC - The court, following the directions of the Appeal Court, tried the issues of limitation and jurisdiction as preliminary issues. The court held that the suit is barred by limitation and that the court lacks territorial jurisdiction as the property is situated in Gujarat, outside the jurisdiction of the Bombay High Court. (Paras 1-13) C) Jurisdiction - Territorial Jurisdiction - Suit for Immovable Property - The suit pertains to immovable property situated in Gujarat, and the defendants reside in Gujarat. The court held that it has no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit as no part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction. (Paras 1-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit is barred by limitation and whether this Court has jurisdiction to try and entertain the suit.
Final Decision
The suit is dismissed as barred by limitation and for lack of jurisdiction. The plaintiffs are directed to pay costs to the defendants.
Law Points
- Limitation Act
- 1963
- Articles 65
- 113
- 120
- Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
- Order XIV Rule 2
- Order VI Rule 16
- Section 151
- Constitution of India
- Article 215
- Territorial jurisdiction
- Suit for partition
- Bar of limitation
- Preliminary issue
