Ahmmadsahab Abdul Mulla (D) By Prop. Lrs vs Bibijan & Ors

The Supreme Court addressed the interpretation of 'date' in Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963, clarifying that it does not necessarily imply a specific calendar date but can be determined based on the circumstances of the case. The Court noted differing interpretations by various High Courts and referenced previous judgments, including Ramzan v. Hussaini and Tarlok Singh v. Vijay Kumar Sabharwal, to establish that the date for performance in a contract may be contingent upon certain events. The Court ultimately held that a purposive interpretation should be applied to the term 'date fixed' in the context of specific performance claims.