Supreme Court of India

Popat and Kotecha Property v State Bank of India Staff Association

2005 INSC 38720051 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
The defendant sought rejection of the plaint under O.VII R.11(d) CPC on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation.
Issue
Whether the plaint could be rejected as barred by law.
Held
The plaint could not be rejected. Under O.VII R.11(d) the bar must appear from the plaint itself read as a whole; where limitation is a disputed question needing evidence it cannot be decided at that stage.
Principle
A plaint is rejected as time-barred only when the bar is clear on its own averments.
Cite this

Facts

  • The defendant sought rejection of the plaint under O.VII R.11(d) CPC on the ground that the suit was barred by limitation.

Issue

  1. Whether the plaint could be rejected as barred by law.

Held

  • The plaint could not be rejected. Under O.VII R.11(d) the bar must appear from the plaint itself read as a whole; where limitation is a disputed question needing evidence it cannot be decided at that stage.

Cite this

Citation

Popat and Kotecha Property v State Bank of India Staff Association 2005 INSC 387

Reported: https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/27145.pdf ; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/232106/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.