Skip to content
rawlaw unfiltered legal news Raw Law

Unfiltered Legal Insights

  • News
  • Services for Advocates
  • Bookmarks
  • facebook.com
  • twitter.com
  • t.me
  • instagram.com
  • youtube.com

” Rejects Delay Beyond Limitation Period Under Order VII Rule 11(d) and Article 113 of Limitation Act

Home - " Rejects Delay Beyond Limitation Period Under Order VII Rule 11(d) and Article 113 of Limitation Act

Chhattisgarh-High-Court-Sets-Aside-Appellate-Court-Decree-Granting-Possession-in-Ancestral-Property-Dispute—The-burden-to-prove-self-acquired-property-lies-on-the-person-who-asserts-such-acquisition
Posted inNews

Chhattisgarh High Court Sets Aside Appellate Court Decree Granting Possession in Ancestral Property Dispute—”The burden to prove self-acquired property lies on the person who asserts such acquisition.”

Court’s Decision The Chhattisgarh High Court, in SA No. 378 of 1992, allowed the second appeal preferred by the defendants and set aside the judgment and decree dated 08.08.1992 passed…
Posted by Rawlaw June 17, 2025
Supreme Court Rules Second Suit for Specific Performance Barred by Limitation: "Right to Sue Stood Extinguished," Rejects Delay Beyond Limitation Period Under Order VII Rule 11(d) and Article 113 of Limitation Act
Posted inNews

Supreme Court Rules Second Suit for Specific Performance Barred by Limitation: “Right to Sue Stood Extinguished,” Rejects Delay Beyond Limitation Period Under Order VII Rule 11(d) and Article 113 of Limitation Act

Court’s Decision: The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the Madras High Court and the trial court, ruling that the second suit filed in 2007 for specific performance was barred…
Posted by Rawlaw January 8, 2025

Recent News

  • Bombay High Court: “Unsuccessful Party Can Also Seek Section 9 Protection”; L&T Directed To Keep ₹150 Crore Bank Guarantee Alive In ONGC Arbitration
  • “He Who Seeks Equity Must Do Equity”: Supreme Court Holds Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Is Not Deposited Within Time
  • Bombay High Court Rejects Tenants’ Plea To Add New Developer; Says Application Prima Facie Appears “Moved And Financed” By Proposed Developer, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs
  • Bombay High Court Refuses To Cancel Bail In Pending Murder Appeal; Says “Bail Once Granted Ought Not To Be Cancelled” Without Strong Grounds
  • Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against HDFC Bank And Phoenix ARC Officials Filed After Recovery Proceedings; Says “Personal Vendetta Writ Large”, Investigation Would Be Abuse Of Process
Copyright 2026 — Raw Law. All rights reserved.
Scroll to Top