Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

april 1966

Supreme Court of India · 1966-04-18

RAM PRASAD DAGDURAM vs VIJAY KUMAR MOTILAL MIRAKHANWALA & ORS.

Citation / case number
SC 1963/162
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
RAM PRASAD DAGDURAM
Respondent
VIJAY KUMAR MOTILAL MIRAKHANWALA & ORS.
Bench
SARKAR, A.K. (CJ)

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court held that the addition of parties under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure cannot be justified as the suit was barred by limitation under Section 22 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908. The Court clarified that a suit by added parties is deemed to be instituted on the date they are added, and since the suit was for foreclosure, it was governed by the Indian Limitation Act which had been extended to the State of Hyderabad. The High Court's order was set aside as it did not properly apply the law of limitation, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

RAM PRASAD DAGDURAM vs VIJAY KUMAR MOTILAL MIRAKHANWALA & ORS. · Niyam