In Brief
Prayag Prasad Dube was dispossessed of his house by the respondents and their father through criminal force and trespass in 1985. The Trial Court convicted them under Section 448 IPC and ordered restoration of possession. Decades later, when the application for possession was made, the Trial Court rejected it as filed beyond 30 days. The Supreme Court held that the 30-day limit applies only to fresh restoration orders, not to enforcement of orders already passed at conviction. Since the Trial Court had already directed restoration during conviction, the later application was not time-barred, and the respondents were directed to hand over possession within one month."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.