Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 30 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2025-04-23 allowed

RAJEEV GUPTA & ORS vs PRASHANT GARG & ORS

Bench: 2 — Dipankar Datta, Prashant Kumar Mishra

In Brief

A man's 1951 will bequeathed a property to two of his three sons. The third son, though not entitled to the property, sold portions of it to the appellants in 1992. The entitled sons sued in 2003 to cancel those sales and recover possession, 11 years later. The Supreme Court held the suit time-barred. Where a plaintiff's title is disputed and he lacks possession, he must sue for both declaration of title and cancellation within three years of knowledge of the transfer—not rely on the 12-year possession period. The will was inadequately proved; non-objection in earlier family suits does not waive Section 68 of the Evidence Act's requirement to prove wills. A decree for mere possession cannot be granted without first establishing the plaintiff's title. The Court restored the trial court's dismissal of the suit.

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

Property Law Limitation Transfer of Property Succession/Wills Civil Procedure Evidence Lis Pendens Declaratory Relief

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