Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Shri Kshetra Mahableshwar Devasthan Trust and its trustees, filed a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge-1, Satara, dated 22nd September 2011, which dismissed their appeal and confirmed the trial court's decree. The original suit was filed by the appellants (plaintiffs) against the respondents (defendants), which included the Government of Maharashtra, the Divisional Forest Officer, Satara, and the Range Forest Officer, Mahableshwar. The suit sought an order for submission of accounts of profits earned from the suit properties from 24th August 1943 till the date of the suit, and a decree directing the defendants to pay 50% of the profits earned and realized from that date, with a minimum of Rs.45,000/-, along with other reliefs. The trial court dismissed the suit, and the first appellate court affirmed that decision. In the second appeal, the appellants argued that the suit was not barred by limitation and that they were entitled to the profits. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the suit was clearly barred by limitation under Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as the right to sue accrued in 1943 when the defendants took possession, and the suit was filed in 1995, beyond the three-year period. The court also found that the appellants failed to produce any evidence to show that the trust was entitled to 50% of the forest revenue from the suit properties. The concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts did not raise any substantial question of law, and the second appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Limitation - Suit for Accounts - Article 113 of Limitation Act, 1963 - The suit for accounts was filed in 1995 claiming profits from 1943 onwards. The court held that the right to sue accrued in 1943 when the defendants took possession, and the suit was clearly barred by limitation as it was filed beyond three years from the date of accrual. (Paras 1-10) B) Trust Property - Right to Forest Revenue - No Evidence of Entitlement - The appellants claimed 50% of forest revenue from suit properties but failed to produce any document showing that the trust was entitled to such profits. The court held that the burden of proof was on the appellants and they failed to discharge it. (Paras 11-15) C) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Section 100 CPC - No Substantial Question of Law - The court found that the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 16-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suit for accounts filed by the appellants was barred by limitation and whether the appellants had any right to claim 50% of the profits from the suit properties.
Final Decision
The second appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree of the learned District Judge-1, Satara dated 22nd September 2011 are confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Limitation Act
- 1963
- Article 113
- Section 100 CPC
- substantial question of law
- suit for accounts
- limitation period
- adverse possession
- trust property
- forest revenue
