Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-02-09 allowed

Purohit and Company vs Khatoonbee and Anr

Bench: 3 — Jagdish Singh Khehar

In Brief

A daughter died in a motor accident on 2 February 1977. Her parents filed a compensation claim 28 years later on 23 February 2005 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Although the Act no longer prescribes a limitation period for filing such claims, the Supreme Court held that claimants must approach the Tribunal within a reasonable time. A delay of 28 years cannot be considered reasonable even in the absence of a statutory limitation. The Court emphasized that such stale claims become 'dead claims' and should not be entertained, regardless of whether a limitation period is prescribed. The appeal was allowed.

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

Motor Vehicles Act Limitation Claims Tribunal Compensation Civil Procedure Delay in Litigation Stale Claims

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