VICTORIA ENTERPRISES LTD vs Mohan S Lalwani

Judgment text excerpt

21-ial-7964-2025.doc varsha IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7964 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL SUIT NO. 39 OF 2015 Victoria Enterprises Limited …. Applicant IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Dnm Trustee Service Private Ltd … Plaintiff Vs Victoria Enterprises Limited and … Respondent Ors Mr. Chirag Mody a/w. Mr. Parag Kabadi, Ms. Drishti Gudhaka i/b. DSK Legal for the Plaintiff. Mr. Manish N. Jain a/w. Ms. Ritu G. Gehlot i/b. S.M. Jain Associates for Applicant in IA/7964/25 and for Defendant No.1 in COMS/39/15. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 9th MARCH 2026 JUDGMENT: 1. This application is filed by defendant no.1 under Order VII Rule 11(a) and (d) of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (‘CPC’) for the rejection of the plaint. Learned counsel for defendant no.1 submits that the suit is time-barred as the plaintiff seeks specific performance of the contract dated Digitally signed by VARSHA VARSHA VIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date: 2026.03.13 Page no. 1 of 12 17:50:41 +0530 21-ial-7964-2025.doc 2nd February 2008 by filing the suit on 29 th September 2015. He submits that, under the agreement, possession was to be handed over on or before 31 st March 2008. Hence, the suit filed in 2015 is barred by limitation. He further points out that the plaintiff has also prayed for damages. The prayer for damages would be covered under Article 55 of the Limitation Act. However, to join a cause of action, the plaintiff is required to seek leave under Order II Rule 4 of the CPC, which has not been sought. Hence, even the prayer for damages would be barred by the limitation period. 2. Learned counsel for defendant no.1, further submits that the agreement dated 2nd February 2008, was executed by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant nos. 3 and 4.