L.K. RAJU Vs. S.N. SAMIAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved over the Fair and Final Order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Coimbatore, in I.A. No. 268 of 2009 in O.S. No. 480 of 2003, granting the final decree, the present appeal came to be filed by the Respondent/Defendant. The parties are arrayed as per their own ranking before the trial Court.

(2.) Brief facts of the plaintiff's case is as follows :-

(3.) The only contention put forth by the learned counsel for the appellant before this Court is that the Application filed by the plaintiff for grant of final decree itself is barred by limitation. Though the preliminary decree was passed on 23.10.2003, the Application was filed only on 1.6.2009, which is barred by limitation. As specified under Art. 137 of the Limitation Act, three years period is given for filing an application for final decree. Whereas final decree application has been filed only on 1.6.2009 beyond three years, which is barred by Limitation. Hence, it is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the application for a final decree itself is barred by limitation, passing of final decree cannot be sustained. According to the learned counsel the right to apply for final decree proceedings arose immediately after the period of two months which was granted by the trial Court for the defendant to pay the amount, which has expired on 23.12.2003 itself and plaintiff ought to have applied for a final decree within a period of three years i.e. on or before 23.12.2006. Whereas, this application has been filed only on 1.6.2009 which is clearly barred by limitation. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant has also relied upon the judgments reported in Pattabirama Naidu Vs. Subramania Chetty - [1918- VII L.W. 438], S. Veluchamy Nadar Vs. Diravia Nadar [1991 (1) L.W. 502] and Monotosh Kumar Mitra Vs. Amarenderanath Shaw [2000 (2) SCC 672].