कौन ज़िम्मेदार? KaunZimmedar

Supreme Court rules limitation issue cannot be tried as preliminary

The case involves a dispute over whether a suit for declaration of a sale deed as void and recovery of possession is barred by limitation, with the core issue being the applicability of Article 59 or Article 65 of the Limitation Act.

Petitioner: John Mathew (Defendant No. 2 in the suit); Respondents: Santha Paul & Ors. (heirs of the Plaintiff T. Oommen Panicker); Bench: Arun Palli, J.

  • The High Court held that the Trial Court erred in deciding the question of limitation as a preliminary issue.
  • The High Court concluded that the question of limitation involved mixed questions of fact and law, requiring determination of whether the Sale Deed was void for want of authority under the GPA before deciding limitation.
  • The High Court answered the substantial questions of law in favor of the Plaintiffs and held the suit to be within limitation.
  • The matter was remitted to the Trial Court for fresh consideration, enabling parties to adduce further evidence.

Written from the document by AI, and checked against it. The original below is authoritative.

The original document

Order 2026-09-21
Tap “Open the PDF” above to view this document.
Document details
Official titleOnce Trial On All Issues Has Started, One Issue Cannot Be Tried As Preliminary: : Supreme Court Explains Order XIV Rule 2(2) CPC
Source bodySupreme Court of India — orders & judgments
Reference numberSLP before the Supreme Court. Before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate V Chitambar
Statusclosed (order)
Year2026
Closing date
Documents1

Discussion (0)

Citizens discussing these documents. A discussion space — nothing here is verified fact or an official finding. Reading is free; sign in to take part.

Open discussion (0) →