Dismissed

Punit Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Director Mr. Jimmy Narendra Patel v. Shripat Laxman Patil (Deceased) Thr. Lrs. Janabai Shripat Patil and Ors.

Bombay HC5 Mar 2024CRA/376/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil revision application was dismissed by the High Court bench, sustaining the Trial Court's order upholding the view that limitation is a mixed question of law and facts requiring trial. The court directed the Trial Court to expedite the hearing of the underlying special civil suit within one year.

What did the court decide?

The Civil Revision Application was disposed dismissing it. The application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was dismissed.

Punit Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Director… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

P1. CRA-376-2023.docx

¶2

Amberkar

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 376 OF 2023

¶6

M/s. Punit Construction Co Pvt Ltd .. Applicant Versus Shripat Laxman Patil (since deceased) through Legal Heirs Janabai Shripat Patil & Ors. .. Respondents

¶7

Mr. Nishant Tripathi i/by M. Tripathi & Co for Applicant

¶8

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : MARCH 5, 2024

¶9

P. C.:

¶10

Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.

¶11

Perused the praecipe dated 05.03.2024. Heard Mr. Tripathi, learned Advocate for Applicant.

¶12

The order impugned in the present Civil Revision Application ( CRA ) is dated 19.12.2022 passed by the learned Trial Court while determining the Application filed under O. VII, Rule 11(d) of the CPC. Learned Trial Court holds that despite the Suit having been filed at much belated stage in the year 2019 in respect of the construction undertaken as far back as in 2005, the cause of action had arisen for the first time in the year 2015 and in that view of the matter, issue of limitation would be a mixed question of law and facts. Though Mr. Tripathi in his usual fairness would submit that two caveats have been

¶13

1 of 2

¶14

P1. CRA-376-2023.docx

¶15

filed by the Caveators but considering the order being passed today, I need not hear the Caveators at all.

¶16

Learned Trial Court has appreciated the averments made in the Plaint and reasoned that the controversy regarding actual knowledge of happening of the cause of action was known to both sides and in those circumstances limitation would be a mixed question of law and facts necessarily required to be decided at the time of trial.

¶17

I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Trial Court. Hence the order dated 19.12.2022 is sustained. Considering that the Suit is filed in the year 2019 and the very limited issue involved in determination of the Suit, I request the learned Trial Court to expedite the hearing of Special Civil Suit No. 358/2019 and decide the same as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of one year from today. Needless to state that all contentions of all parties are expressly kept open.

¶18

With the above direction, Civil Revision Application is disposed.

¶19

Amberkar

¶20

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶21

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA RAVINDRA MOHAN MOHAN AMBERKAR AMBERKAR Date: 2024.03.05 18:37:18 +0530

¶22

2 of 2

Punit Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Director Mr. Jimmy Narendra Patel v. Shripat Laxman Patil (Deceased) Thr. Lrs. Janabai Shripat Patil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punit Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Director Mr. Jimmy Narendra Patel v. Shripat Laxman Patil (Deceased) Thr. Lrs. Janabai Shripat Patil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devendra Kishor Kale Vs Vimalbai Somnath More and Ors.

Asif Hasmat Ali Khan vs State of Maharashtra

Umesh Chandrashekhar Shetty @ Anna vs State of Maharashtra

Shankar Chintaman Sarangdhar Since Dec Thr Legal Heirs and Anr. vs Sindhudurg Estates Thr Its MD and Anr.

Msl Driveline Systems Limited vs M/S Kshitij Enterprises through Proprietor

Mrs. Naseema Fariduddin Siddiqui vs Mr. Rais Ahmed Siddiqui