On October 15, 2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India delivered its judgment in Karam Singh vs. Amarjit Singh & Others (Civil Appeal No. arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 3560-3561/2023, 2025 INSC 1238). Hon’ble Justice Manoj Misra and Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala set aside the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court’s orders dated January 27, 2022 (Civil Revision No. 725/2020) and order dated July 4, 2022 (dismissing Misc. Application No. 7259/2022), and restored the Ld. Trial Court’s order dated January 7, 2020, wherein the Ld. Trial Court dismissed the defendant’s application to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of CPC.
The case involves a century long property dispute originating when Ronak Singh alias Ronaki died intestate on October 5, 1924. His widow, Kartar Kaur, and his sisters Chinki and Nikki contested ownership. On March 22, 1935, the civil court held Kartar Kaur’s gift to Harchand invalid, declaring her possessing limited rights. On September 11, 1975, the gift was formally set aside, and Kartar Kaur was declared the owner. Consequently, mutation was sanctioned on May 13, 1976. Kartar Kaur died on December 28, 1983, with a will dated December 15, 1976, allegedly executed in defendants’ favour. Despite the will, mutation was ordered on April 29, 1984, in favour of Ronak Singh’s sisters’ legal representatives. This decision was affirmed on April 15, 1985 and litigation finally culminated on July 20, 2017.
On May 31, 2019, the appellant instituted Suit No. 424 of 2019 seeking declaration of ownership, possession, mesne profits for the period from May 2016 to May 2019, and permanent injunction. The defendants sought plaint rejection under Order 7 Rule 11(d), citing the three-year limitation period since 1983. The trial court rejected this on January 7, 2020, finding the suit was not ex facie barred by limitation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court emphasized that Order 7 Rule 11(d) analysis must consider only plaint averments. Significantly, the will’s existence in mutation proceedings does not constitute probate or valid title testing inter se parties. The Hon’ble Court reiterated that mutation entries serve fiscal purposes and do not confer title, citing Balwant Singh v. Daulat Singh (1997) 7 SCC 137 and Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commissioner (2007) 6 SCC 186.
Relying on Indira v. Arumugam & Anr. (1998) 1 SCC 614, the Hon’ble Court held that for title-based possession suits, defendants must prove adverse possession for the prescriptive period. The burden of proving the same lies on the defendants and not on the plaintiffs. The Hon’ble Court cited Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. v. Mahaveer Lunia (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1208), establishing that if any relief sought is within the limitation period, the plaint cannot be rejected.
For declaration of title to immovable property, the Hon’ble Court referenced N. Thajudeen v. Tamil Nadu Khadi & Village Industries Board (2024 SCC Online SC 3037) and C. Mohammad Yunis v. Syed Unnissa (AIR 1961 SC 808), holding that such suits are not barred so long as the right subsists. While declaration’s limitation is three years (Article 58, Limitation Act), possession recovery limitation is 12 years from when possession becomes adverse (Article 65). The Hon’ble Court cited Jitendra Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2021 SCC OnLine SC 802), Faqruddin Dead through LRs v. Tajuddin Dead through LRs (2008) 8 SCC 12, and Rajinder Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir & others (2008) 9 SCC 368 establishing that regular suits questioning summary mutations are not ex facie barred.
The High Court failed to consider that the plaintiffs had contested the will throughout mutation proceedings concluding July 20, 2017, and instituted the suit within three years on May 31, 2019. Regarding Order 2 Rule 2 of CPC, if a prior suit (Civil Suit No. 648/2012, rejected on May 17, 2013) has failed on procedural grounds, then a fresh suit with appropriate relief cannot be prima facie barred. The Hon’ble Supreme Court directed the trial court to proceed to logical conclusion, clarifying that observations were limited to plaint rejection determination only .