Latest JudgementThe Limitation Act, 1963

Babu Singh (D) Thr. LRs & Anr. v. Jalandhar Improvement Trust & Anr., 2026

The Court reinforced the principle of limitation for execution of decrees under Article 135 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Supreme Court of India·23 February 2026

The Limitation Act, 1963

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date of Decision

23 February 2026

Judges

Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Manmohan

Citation

Acts / Provisions

Section 13(1)(ia), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Facts of the Case

A mandatory injunction was issued in favor of the petitioners by the First Appellate Court vide order dated 06.01.2005.
The decree did not specify a date for performance of the injunction.
Petitioners approached the Executing Court on 12.08.2010 seeking enforcement of the mandatory injunction.
The Executing Court dismissed the execution application as time-barred, applying the three-year limitation period under Article 135.
Petitioners filed a revision petition before the High Court, which also dismissed the petition.
Aggrieved, petitioners approached the Supreme Court, seeking interference with the lower courts’ orders.

Whether a decree for a mandatory injunction without a specified date for performance can be enforced beyond the three-year limitation period under Article 135 of the Limitation Act, 1963?
Whether the Executing Court committed any error in dismissing the execution application as time-barred in the absence of a specified date for performance?
Whether the Supreme Court should interfere with the lower courts’ findings regarding limitation under Article 135 in this case?

Execution applications for mandatory injunctions without a specified date are limited to three years from the date of the decree.
No error was committed by the Executing Court or the High Court in dismissing the petitioners’ execution application.
Petition dismissed.

The Court reinforced the principle of limitation for execution of decrees under Article 135 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Legal reasoning: When a decree for a mandatory injunction does not fix a performance date, the limitation period cannot extend beyond three years from the decree.
Principle applied: The Limitation Act provides certainty and prevents indefinite delay in enforcement of decrees.
Impact: Clarifies the computation of limitation periods for mandatory injunctions and prevents parties from filing execution applications after a prolonged delay.
The judgment upholds judicial efficiency and discourages litigation delays.