Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Period for Specific Performance Suits in Landmark Judgment

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has clarified that the limitation period for filing a specific performance suit begins from the date fixed for the performance of the contract, rather than from the expiry of the agreement’s validity.

This decision came as the bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B Varale, set aside the concurrent findings of both the High Court and the First Appellate Court. The courts below had incorrectly relied on a clause that stated the agreement would remain valid for five years from the date of execution. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that this clause was irrelevant to determining the date of performance.

The bench observed:

“The First Appellate Court and the High Court went on the consideration that the agreement further recorded that this agreement would remain valid for a period of five years from today’s date i.e., date of the execution of the agreement to sell. Placing reliance on this clause, in our considered opinion, is totally irrelevant. The performance was to take place within one month. The validity of the agreement is something different and does not change the date of performance. What was the reason for incorporating this clause of validating the agreement for five years is not spelled out in the agreement, but in any case, it does not change the date fixed for the performance.”

The court referred to Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in reaching its conclusion. In the present case, the sale deed was supposed to be executed within one month from the date of the agreement, dated 17.12.1989. This meant the performance should have occurred by 16.01.1990, and therefore, the limitation period for filing a suit would expire three years later on 16.01.1993.

However, the respondent filed the suit for specific performance in September 1993, well beyond the three-year limitation period. The respondent contended that the limitation period should be counted from the expiry of the agreement’s five-year validity, but the Supreme Court rejected this argument, reiterating that the date of performance, not the validity period, determines the start of the limitation period.

In conclusion, the court held that the period of limitation is to be calculated from the date fixed for performance as outlined in the agreement. The appeal was accordingly allowed, and the lower courts’ judgments were set aside.

Case Details:

– Case Name: Usha Devi & Ors. versus Ram Kumar Singh & Ors.
– Civil Appeal No.: 8446 of 2024

 

usha-devi-v-ram-kumar-singh-validity-of-agreement-have-no-role-to-determine-the-period-of-limitation-554852

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Disclaimer: Current rules of the Bar Council of India impose restrictions on maintaining a web page and do not permit lawyers to provide information concerning their areas of practice. Conventus Law Offices is, therefore, constrained from providing any further information on this web page.

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

Conventus Law Offices is not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website. In cases where the user has any legal issues, he/she in all cases must seek independent legal advice.