Zubair Khan vs Kachkol Khan S — 2025 YLR 394 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Zubair Khan VS Kachkol Khan S. 3, First Sched., arts. 61 & 62---Suit for recovery, filing of---Limitation---Law of limitation cannot be considered merely as a formality, but the same is required to be observed and taken into consideration being mandatory in nature---Purpose behind law of limitation is to help the vigilant and not the indolent and helping hand could not be extended to a litigant having gone into a deep slumber or having become forgetful of his right---It is provided by S.3 of the Limitation act, 1908, that, subject to the provision of Ss.4 to 25, every suit instituted, appeal preferred and application made after the period of limitation prescribed therefore shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been set up as a defence---Section 3 of the Limitation act, 1908, is couched in mandatory form and entails penalty of dismissal of suit if instituted after the period of limitation prescribed in the First Schedule of the Limitation act, 1908---any person may have an enforceable right but if he fails to enforce such a right within time stipulated by law, then such right becomes unenforceable---Point of limitation, even if not pressed or taken, the Court is under obligation to ensure that the question of limitation is scrutinized, for such question deals with assumption of jurisdiction to grant relief---Period of limitation of three years is provided under arts.61 & 62 in the First Schedule of the Limitation act, 1908, for suit relating to money payable to the plaintiff for money paid for the defendant, and for money payable by defendant to the plaintiff for money received by the defendant for the plaintiff's use---In both cases, the limitation starts from the time when the money is either paid or the money is received and the period of limitation for the said purpose is three years---assertions of the plaintiff's evidence were very clear that an amount of Rs. 1,236,000/- Qatari Riyals was given to the defendant in the year 1984, whereas an amount of Rs. 2,10,00,000/- was given to the defendant in the year 1993---Said amount was demanded for the last time through a Jirga which was conducted in the year 2009, whereas the suit was brought before the court in the year 2018, which was obviously beyond the period of limitation---Despite the fact that the said amount was due against the defendants/appellants, however, in view of the clear bar provided under S.3 of the Limitation act, 1908, no decree could be passed in favour of the plaintiff against defendants/appellants---Thus, Trial Court had incorrectly dealt with the period of limitation from the date when the same was demanded through the office of Home Department of the Province---Therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff against the defendants / appellants must fail on the point of limitation---High Court set-aside impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court ; consequently, the suit of the plaintiff against the appellants stood dismissed on the point of limitation---appeal, filed by defendant, was allowed, in circumstances.

Zubair Khan vs Kachkol Khan S — 2025 YLR 394 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR