Supreme Court Dismisses Partition Suit as Barred by Limitation: Upholds Effect of Prior Partition and Registered Sale Deeds as Notice.


02 April 2025 Civil Appeals >> Civil & Consumer Law   |   Sale Deed >> Personal Law   |   Partition Related Issue >> Property & Real Estate  

In Uma Devi & Others v/s Anand Kumar & Others., the Supreme Court overturned a High Court order that had remanded a partition suit back to the Trial Court. The suit, filed in 2023, sought partition of ancestral property whose original owner, Boranna, passed away leaving four sons. The plaintiffs were Boranna's great-grandchildren (grandchildren of one of the sons, Shivanna). The defendants (appellants) argued that the suit was not maintainable due to limitation and a prior oral partition in 1968 among Boranna's sons, which was reflected in revenue records. They further pointed to registered sale deeds executed by family members, including the plaintiffs' aunt, starting in 1978, arguing these constituted constructive notice.

The Trial Court had dismissed the suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, finding it barred by limitation and lacking a cause of action. However, the High Court held that there were triable issues and remanded the matter.


 

 

The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court. It noted that the partition occurred in 1968, and registered sale deeds, providing public notice, were executed from 1978 onwards. Citing established legal principles, including the effect of registration as notice (as held in Suraj Lamp Industries) and the possibility of rejecting plaints barred by law at the threshold (as outlined in Madanuri Sri Rama Chandra Murthy and Dahiben), the Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiffs' suit, filed 55 years after the alleged partition and 45 years after the registered sale deeds, was prima facie barred by limitation. The plaintiffs failed to adequately explain when they gained knowledge of these transactions.

The Supreme Court found that the Trial Court had correctly dismissed the suit as meaningless litigation lacking a proper cause of action and being time-barred. It set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeals, effectively dismissing the partition suit.


  Code of Civil Procedure, 1908