Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

SUIT FOR COMPENSATION FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION ON PRIVATE LAND BARRED BY LIMITATION: SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India ruled that a suit filed for the construction of a road on private land without payment of compensation was barred by limitation. The Court set aside the High Court's decision and restored the judgment and decree of the trial court dismissing the suit.

The dispute arose when the State of Himachal Pradesh and others constructed a road, known as "Tikkari-Larot-Bodra Kwar road," on the land belonging to Chandervir Singh Negi. The plaintiff claimed that the road was built without complying with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and without compensating him for his land and the damage caused to his fruit-bearing trees.

The Supreme Court, examining the evidence, noted that the road was constructed in 1987 with the plaintiff's consent. The plaintiff had not raised any objections or claimed compensation until 2002, which indicated his consent to the construction. Considering the delay in filing the suit, the Court held that it was barred by limitation under Articles 58 and 72 of the Limitation Act.

Quoting from the judgment, the Court stated, "The fact remains that the road in question was constructed in the year 1987; the trees, if any, were damaged/removed in the year 1987; the retaining/protection wall was constructed on the land of the plaintiff in the year 1987, and the suit was filed in the year 2003. Therefore, the suit was barred by limitation."

The Court further highlighted that the High Court had erred in not framing a substantial question of law on the issue of limitation and had failed to consider the specific facts of the case. The judgment and order of the High Court were deemed unsustainable, and the Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's decision.

DATE OF DECISION: February 24, 2023

State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.    VS Chandervir Singh Negi 

Latest Legal News