Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Amjad Ali Vs. Abdul

Amjad Ali vs Abdul

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Apr 28, 1998
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/768815

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
S.B. Civil Revision No. 701 of 1997
Subject
Limitation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Limitation Act - Section 5--Applicability to Rent Act--In the rent case, the defence was struck down--An application to condone the delay was moved under Section 5 but the Courts did not adjudicate on it--Limitation Act is applicable to Rent Act, 1950--By not deciding the application material irregularity has been c...

Key legal issue
Limitation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Amjad Ali

Respondent

Abdul

Legal References

Cases Referred
Sita Ram Agarwal v. Nasiruddin
Reported In
1998(1)WLN347

Excerpt

limitation act - section 5--applicability to rent act--in the rent case, the defence was struck down--an application to condone the delay was moved under section 5 but the courts did not adjudicate on it--limitation act is applicable to rent act, 1950--by not deciding the application material irregularity has been committed--the case is remanded.;revision allowed with cost of rs. 1,000/- - bhagwati prasad, j.1. in this case the case of the revisionist is that he had made an application under section 5 of limitation act, which has not been finally adjudicated by the courts below.2. the counsel for the respondents was asked to point out finding in the matter. at the initial stage, he has read the operative portion of the order but he could not point out any finding. then the learned counsel took the liberty of reading the whole judgment and read it, then too he could not point out, that there was any finding of the courts below for rejecting the application under section 5 of the limitation act. this hon'ble court by a full bench judgment reported in 1998 (1) wlc 325 (l.b), sita ram agarwal v. nasiruddin, has held that section 5 limitation act has application in rent control matters. in view of the law laid down by this court, it was necessary for the courts below to have finally adjudicated the application under section 5 of limitation act. the courts have committed material irregularity in not deciding the application under section 5 of the limitation act. the orders impugned are set aside. the case is remanded back to the trial court to first adjudicate application under section 5 limitation act then decide the application for striking off the defence. the non-petitioner shall pay the cost of rs. 1000/- to the petitioner.

Full Judgment

Bhagwati Prasad, J.

1. In this case the case of the revisionist is that he had made an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, which has not been finally adjudicated by the Courts below.

2. The counsel for the respondents was asked to point out finding in the matter. At the initial stage, he has read the operative portion of the order but he could not point out any finding. Then the learned Counsel took the liberty of reading the whole judgment and read it, then too he could not point out, that there was any finding of the Courts below for rejecting the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. This Hon'ble Court by a Full Bench Judgment reported in 1998 (1) WLC 325 (L.B), Sita Ram Agarwal v. Nasiruddin, has held that Section 5 Limitation Act has application in rent control matters. In view of the law laid down by this Court, it was necessary for the Courts below to have finally adjudicated the application under Section 5 of Limitation Act. The Courts have committed material irregularity in not deciding the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The orders impugned are set aside. The case is remanded back to the trial Court to first adjudicate application under Section 5 Limitation Act then decide the application for striking off the defence. The non-petitioner shall pay the cost of Rs. 1000/- to the petitioner.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial