Latest News
Back
Limitation period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act begins when the right to sue accrues and not when the right to sue
The Supreme court has held that the limitation period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act begins when the right to sue accrues and not when the right to sue ‘first’ accrues. The 3-judge bench of the Supreme court comprising of AM Khanwilkar, Indira Banerjee and Dinesh Maheshwari was considering an appeal against the decision of the Delhi high court which had affirmed the decision of the lower courts to reject a plea on the grounds of that the plea was barred by limitation under order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC.
The appellant had filed a suit against the respondent bank for the rendition of true and correct accounts as regards commission or interest charged and deduction by the bank between the year 1997 and 2000. The applicant had also demand recovery of excess amount which was deducted by the bank and for 18% interest on the same from the date when deductions were made till the realization of the amount. After various communication sent by the appellant to the bank, thereafter the appellant need not correspond in this regard. Further the appellant sent legal notices to the bank and subsequently filed a suit in February 2005. However the suit was rejected by the trial court as being barred by the limitation under Article 113 of the Limitation Act.
Thereafter the decision of the trial court was upheld by the District court and then affirmed by the Delhi high court. however the supreme court took a different view in the case and allowed the appeal. It held that the limitation period would not bar this suit, given that the right to sue accrued in 2002. The court noted that the right to sue accrued for the plaintiff on various occasions, each time a letter in response to plaintiff’s communication was received by him by the respondent bank. That it is well established position that the cause of action for filing a suit would consist of bundle of facts. Further, the factum of suit being barred by limitation, ordinarily would be a mixed question of fact and law. It was further held that the view taken by the lower courts entailed a reading of Article 113 which deals with when the right to sue accrues as when the right t sue first accrues. Thus, the court opined would be rewriting of that position and doing violence to the legislative intent.
