Babu Singh (D) vs Jalandhar Improvement Trust Limitation Act - Mandatory Injunction Decree
Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 135 - Limitation for enforcement of a decree granting a mandatory injunction - When the decree passed by the First Appellate Court did not specify any date for performance, the limitation period would commence from the date of the decree (Para 4-5)
Case Info
Case Information
Case name: Babu Singh (Deceased) through Legal Representatives & Anr. v. Jalandhar Improvement Trust & Anr.Court: Supreme Court of IndiaCase type/number: Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 4284 of 2023Neutral citation: Not mentioned in the order (no SCC/neutral citation is given in the text).
Coram
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj MisraHon’ble Mr. Justice Manmohan
Judgment Date
17 February 2026
Statutes / Laws Referred
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order XXI Rule 32 (execution of decree for specific performance, restitution of conjugal rights or for an injunction).
- Limitation Act, 1963 – Article 135 of the Schedule (limitation for enforcement of a decree granting a mandatory injunction; three years from date of decree or from date fixed for performance).
Caselaws and Citations
The order does not refer to or cite any previous case law or reported citation. It only discusses the facts, the appellate decree, and Article 135 of the Limitation Act without relying on specific precedents.
Brief Summary (Three Sentences)
The Supreme Court considered a challenge to a Punjab & Haryana High Court order dated 20.09.2022, which had upheld the Execution Court’s dismissal of an execution application filed under Order XXI Rule 32 CPC as time-barred. The First Appellate Court’s decree dated 06.01.2005 had granted, inter alia, a mandatory injunction in favour of the plaintiffs, but the decree did not fix any date for performance, so limitation under Article 135 of the Limitation Act ran from the date of that decree, rendering the execution application filed on 12.08.2010 beyond the three-year period. Holding that the execution was confined to enforcement of the mandatory injunction part of the decree and that the Execution Court and High Court had correctly applied Article 135, the Supreme Court found no ground to interfere and dismissed the Special Leave Petition, disposing of pending applications.