
When Does Limitation For Application Under Order XXI Rule 95 CPC Start? Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench, Doubts '96 Precedent
Live LawThe Supreme Court recently referred a pertinent question of law for reconsideration by a larger bench. The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal was hearing an appeal against a Kerala High Court judgment which dismissed the revision application by holding that the starting point of limitation for making an application under Rule 95 of Order XXI was the date on which the sale certificate was issued by the Executing Court. The court observed “Though CPC does not permit an application under Rule 95 of Order XXI to be filed before the sale certificate is issued, Article 134 of the Limitation Act proceeds on the footing that cause of action becomes available to the auction purchaser to apply for possession on the basis of the order of confirmation of sale made under subrule of Rule 92 of Order XXI of CPC.” The Court further pondered if interpretative approach can be used to address the inconsistencies and anomalies present in this context. It added, “The very fact that Rule 94 of Order XXI incorporates a requirement of issuing a sale certificate shows that the Legislature was of the view that mere order of confirmation of auction may not be sufficient.The certificate is ultimately the evidence of the fact that the auction in favour of the person to whom a certificate is issued, has been confirmed by the Executing Court.” The court was of the opinion that it could reconcile Art 134, Limitation Act and Rule 95 of CPC by considering the issuance of the sale certificate as the starting point for making an application under Rule 95. The court held “Prima facie, it appears to us that the only way of avoiding inconsistency between Rule 95 of Order XXI of CPC and Article 134 of the Limitation Act is to read into Article 134 that the starting point for making an application under Rule 95 of Order XXI of CPC is the date on which a certificate recording confirmation of auction sale is actually issued to the purchaser.
History of this topic

Section 47 CPC Applications Raising Property Rights After Passing Of Decree To Be Treated As Application Under Order 21 Rule 97 : Supreme Court
Live Law
Section 47 CPC Applications Raising Property Rights After Passing Of Decree To Be Treated As Application Under Order 21 Rule 97 : Supreme Court
Live Law
Knowledge About Sale Deed Can't Be Presumed From Date Of Its Registration; Limitation Period Starts From Date Of Knowledge : Supreme Court
Live Law
Second Suit On Same Cause Of Action Must Be Filed Within 3 Years Of Rejection Of Earlier Plaint : Supreme Court
Live Law
Order 23 Rule 2 CPC| Limitation For Suit Instituted Afresh Applies As If Earlier Suit Was Never Filed: Jharkhand High Court
Live Law![[O.21 R.95] Buyers Of Property From Auction Purchaser Can Make Application Before Executing Court To Obtain Possession: Karnataka HC](/static/images/error.jpg)
[O.21 R.95] Buyers Of Property From Auction Purchaser Can Make Application Before Executing Court To Obtain Possession: Karnataka HC
Live Law
Order XXI CPC | Failure To Raise Objections Before Proclamation Of Sale Not Bar To Challenge An Irregular Sale: Kerala High Court
Live Law
Order XXI Rule 90 CPC | Stranger To Suit Can Challenge Sale If Entitled To Share In Rateable Distribution Of Assets: Kerala High Court
Live Law
What Is The Scope Of Limitation In Suit For Specific Performance Where No Time Was Mentioned For Execution Of Sale Deed? MP High Court Answers
Live Law
Purchaser Of Suit Property Cannot File Application Under Order XXI Rule 97 CPC Objecting Execution Of Decree By Decree Holder: Supreme Court
Live LawDiscover Related




![Supreme Court Weekly Digest With Subject /Statute Wise Index [March 01 to 09]](/static/images/error.jpg)
















![[O.39 R.3 CPC] Court Must Give Reasons For Granting Ad-Interim Injunction Without Notice To Opposite Party: Karnataka HC Reiterates](/static/images/error.jpg)





















