2008 (5) TMI 747 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Determination of period of limitation in a suit for redemption of mortgage.

Summary:
In a case involving a suit for redemption of a mortgage, the main issue was the period of limitation. The suit property was mortgaged in 1913, but the actual date of the mortgage was unknown. The trial court and the First Appellate Court dismissed the suit as barred by limitation due to lack of clarity on the mortgage date. However, the High Court, in a second appeal, considered the relationship between the parties and the onus of proving limitation. The High Court allowed the appeal based on the established relationship of mortgagor and mortgagee.

The appellant argued that the suit should be barred by limitation as the date of mutation was not the date of the mortgage. On the other hand, the respondent sought to introduce additional evidence, a registered mortgage deed from 1913, to prove that the suit was within the limitation period. The respondents claimed inheritance of the mortgaged properties and disputed the defendant's denial of the relationship between the parties.

The Supreme Court held that limitation is a question of jurisdiction and that the onus to prove limitation lies on the plaintiff. The Court found that the respondents had grounds to adduce additional evidence, specifically the 1913 mortgage deed, which could establish that the suit was filed within the prescribed period of limitation. Therefore, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the previous judgment, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for the consideration of the additional evidence.