BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. versus PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. versus PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA

Appellant-company, though a statutory authority and wholly owned by the Central Government, is not the Central Government and is not entitled to thirty-year limitation under Article 112 of the Limitation Act. The suit was correctly dismissed as time-barred, as agencies or instrumentalities do not qualify for Article 112's benefit.

Parties
Appellant: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.; Respondent: Pawan Kumar Gupta
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Affirming Dismissal of Original Suit as Barred by Limitation
Outcome
Dismissed
Legal Topics
Applicability of Limitation Act Article 112, Statutory Authority and Central Government Distinction, Transfer of Actionable Claims Under TP Act
Limitation Law Corporate Law Applicability of Limitation Act Article 112 Statutory Authority and Central Government Distinction Transfer of Actionable Claims Under TP Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

Appellant

Pawan Kumar Gupta

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Affirming Dismissal of Original Suit as Barred by Limitation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a statutory authority company is entitled to the benefit of Limitation Act Article 112 (thirty-year limitation period) when assets/liabilities are transferred by the Central Government
  2. 2 Whether agencies or instrumentalities of the Central Government are incorporated for the benefit of Article 112

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant-company, though a statutory authority and wholly owned by the Central Government, is not the Central Government and is not entitled to thirty-year limitation under Article 112 of the Limitation Act. The suit was correctly dismissed as time-barred, as agencies or instrumentalities do not qualify for Article 112's benefit.

Court Disposition

Dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed. No costs.
  • Appellant permitted to withdraw deposited sum of Rs.25,000/- with interest, if any, as respondent remained absent.