CAUSE TITLE:
State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors Versus Chandervir Singh Negi
DATE OF ORDER:
24-02-2023
JUDGE(S):
M. R. Shah, C.T. Ravikumar
PARTIES:
Petitioner:State of Himachal Pradesh
Respondent:Chandervir Singh Negi
SUBJECT
The Supreme Court has granted the State of Himachal Pradesh's appeals under Articles 58 and 72 of the Limitation Act.
The State had challenged the verdict of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which had permitted the respondent's appeal and annulled and set aside the Trial Court's decision.
BRIEF FACTS
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE APPELLANT
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT
"The High Court has not framed any substantial question of law on the limitation and/or the suit being barred by limitation," the two-judge bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice C.T. Ravikumar ruled. "The suit was barred by limitation considering Articles 58 and 72 of the Limitation Act, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court are unsustainable and deserve to be quashed and set aside."
The Bench stated that the High Court did not make its decisions based on general, overarching principles and did not give the relevant facts any consideration.
In light of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Supreme Court observed that "the High Court has allowed the Second Appeal and has quashed and set aside the concurrent findings recorded by both Courts below and has, as a result, decreed the suit without even considering the issue thecerningthe limitation."
The Trial Court determined that the lawsuit was time-barred by consideration of Articles 58 and 72 of the Limitation Act, and the First Appellate Court upheld that decision, according to the Court. The High Court, exercising its authority under Section 100 of the CPC, should not have interfered with the Trial Court's findings of fact.
The High Court's substantial question of law, the Court said, "cannot even be considered to be a considerable question of law at all."
The court reinstated the Trial Court's decision to dismiss the case, which was upheld by the First Appellate Court. As a result, the Court upheld the appeals and declared the High Court's decision invalid.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement