RAMZAN versus SMT. HUSSAINI
Where an agreement stipulates performance upon the occurrence of a certain event, such as the redemption of a mortgage, the date for performance is 'fixed' within the meaning of Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and limitation begins to run upon the happening of that event. Thus, the suit filed after the expiry of three years from the date of redemption is barred by limitation.
- Parties
- Appellant: Ramzan; Respondent: Smt. Hussaini
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 24 November 1989
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Before Supreme Court
- Outcome
- appeal allowed, respondent's suit dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Limitation, Specific Performance, Contingent Contract
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ramzan
Appellant
Smt. Hussaini
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave Before Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 When does the period of limitation begin for filing a suit for specific performance of a contingent contract under Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963?
- 2 Was the date for performance 'fixed' under the agreement for the purposes of Article 54?
Ratio Decidendi
Where an agreement stipulates performance upon the occurrence of a certain event, such as the redemption of a mortgage, the date for performance is 'fixed' within the meaning of Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and limitation begins to run upon the happening of that event. Thus, the suit filed after the expiry of three years from the date of redemption is barred by limitation.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed, respondent's suit dismissed
Orders
- Impugned judgments of the High Court and trial court set aside.
- Suit for specific performance dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment