SUKHBIRI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by Special Leave is directed against the judgment and order in RSA No.79/2007 dtd. 25/8/2009 passed by the High Court of Delhi. The appellants were plaintiffs in Suit No.410 of 2000 on the file of the Court presided over by Shri Vidya Prakash, Civil Judge, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court'), filed seeking reliefs mainly against the 5th Respondent. The Trial Court framed a preliminary issue on the question of limitation, evidently, upon forming the opinion that case may be disposed of on an issue of law and that it warrants postponement of settlement of other issues until after that issue has been determined and to deal with the suit in accordance with the decision on that issue. Accordingly, the Trial Court framed a preliminary question as to "whether the Suit is within the limitation". Upon answering the same in the negative, in accordance with the said decision, the suit was dismissed as per judgment dtd. 13/5/2005. The defendants challenged the said judgment and decree before the Court presided over by Shri Sukhdev Singh, Additional District Judge, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the 'First Appellate Court') in Civil Appeal No.99/2005 and it dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree of the Trial Court, as per judgment dtd. 8/12/2006. Thereupon, they took up the matter in second appeal before the High Court. As per the impugned judgment dtd. 25/8/2009 the High Court concurred with the findings and dismissed the appeal answering the question of law against the appellants. Leave was granted in Special Leave Petition No.34648 of 2009 filed against the stated judgment of the High Court and in this civil appeal, the respondents were granted liberty to file counter affidavits.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and also the learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents.

(3.) At the outset, it is to be noted that the challenge in this appeal is against concurrent findings by three Courts, as mentioned hereinbefore. The scope of an appeal by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India against the concurrent findings is well settled. In State of Rajasthan v. Shiv Dayal 2019 8 SCC 637 reiterating the settled position, this Court held that a concurrent finding of fact is binding, unless it is infected with perversity. It was held therein:-