Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Wednesday, 05 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2020-03-17 allowed

AARIFABEN YUNUSBHAI PATEL vs MUKUL THAKOREBHAI AMIN

Bench: 2 — Deepak Gupta, L. Nageswara Rao

In Brief

In a debt recovery suit, a cooperative bank obtained a decree against partnership firm members for failing to repay a loan. After the decree was challenged in the Tribunal, the bank executed it through court-ordered auction of properties on 26 November 2007. The judgment-debtor's representative failed to file timely objections but later filed a writ petition and Special Leave Petition. Only on 20 June 2008 did he file an objection application under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC—over seven months later. The Supreme Court held that the 60-day statutory period for filing such objections (Article 127, Limitation Act) cannot be extended; Section 5 (condonation of delay) explicitly excludes Order XXI applications; and Section 14 (exclusion for good faith pursuit of other remedies) cannot apply where the other proceedings lacked due diligence or good faith. The appeal was allowed and the auction sale upheld.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Execution of Decree Limitation Auction Sale Order XXI Rule 90

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login