In Brief
A man challenged a registered gift deed executed in 1981, claiming it was a sham. However, he filed the suit in 2003—22 years later—without ever disputing the deed during that period. The trial court and High Court refused to dismiss the case at the threshold, treating limitation as a factual issue requiring evidence. The Supreme Court held that when a plaint's own averments reveal the suit is barred by limitation, it must be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC without waiting for trial. The plaintiff's framing the relief as a declaration rather than explicitly asking to set aside the deed was 'clever drafting' to circumvent the three-year limitation under Article 59. The appeal was allowed and the plaint rejected.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.