NITIN SAXENA Vs. AMIT SAXENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed by the defendant under Order VII Rule 11 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC') seeking rejection of the reliefs sought in the plaint on the ground that it has been filed beyond the limitation period of three years as prescribed under the Limitation Act, 1963 ('Limitation Act'). Arguments on behalf of the defendant

(2.) Mr. Saket Sikri and Mr Anirudh Bakhru, learned counsels for the applicant/defendant stated that the present suit filed in October, 2023 seeking a decree of declaration and cancellation of the two release deeds, which were admittedly executed by the plaintiff on 13/8/2014 in respect of the property bearing No. WZ-300A, built-up on Plot No.GL-11, part of Khasra No.839-840 situated in the area of Village Tihar, New Delhi now known as G-Block, Hari Nagar, New Delhi admeasuring total area of 200 sq. yds. ('suit property') is barred by limitation. It is stated that as per Articles 58 and 59 of the Limitation Act the period of limitation to seek cancellation expired on 13/8/2017 and the present suit filed in October, 2023 after a lapse of more than 9 years is, therefore, barred in law.

(3.) In reply, Mr. Pawanjit Bindra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the non- applicant/plaintiff stated that the two release deeds in respect of the suit property were executed by the plaintiff on the representation of the defendant that the said documentation would facilitate obtaining statutory permissions and licences from the local authorities, which in turn would enable fetching higher rental for the suit property. He stated that no consideration was received by the plaintiff under the release deeds as the said documents were not intended to denude the plaintiff of his 50% ownership rights in the suit property. He stated that the transaction of release recorded in the said release deeds was never intended to be acted upon and the documents are a sham.