Dhiraj Dutta v. Anirban Sen 2026 INSC 602 - Limitation- Revocation of Probate- Constructive Notice

Limitation - Revocation of probate - As to when “the right to apply” would accrue, that depends on the date from which the party making the application had knowledge. (Para 8) [Context: The dispute arose from a 1989 Will of Smt. Gouriprova Sen under which her nephew, the appellant, obtained probate in 1995; the respondents, related to the testatrix’s husband, sought revocation of that probate only in 2022, claiming lack of knowledge until 2019. The Supreme Court held that, under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, the “right to apply” for revocation accrued when the respondents received notice in 2013 in mutation proceedings and that their failure to act amounted to constructive notice, making the 2022 application hopelessly time‑barred. Consequently, the Court set aside the Division Bench judgment, restored the Single Judge’s order dismissing the revocation application, and allowed the appeal.]

Practice and Procedure - Constructive notice - (a) It is a deeming fiction within law that originated from equity and is distinguishable from actual notice as it is an inferral by law; (b) It hinges on either wilful abstention or gross negligence. (c) The question of whether or not something qualifies as constructive notice is either a question of fact or a mixed question of law and fact dependant on the facts and circumstances of each case; (d) The standard to be applied in determining wilful abstention or gross negligence is that of a reasonably prudent man as applied in Indian conditions. (Para 9)