Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Q 1. Mr. X filed a civil suit for recovery of money against Mr. Y. Due to the non-appearance of both parties, the suit was dismissed under Order IX Rule 2 CPC. Mr. X then filed an application under Order IX Rule 4 CPC for restoration, which was also dismissed. Subsequently, Mr. X filed a fresh suit for the same recovery. Mr. Y contends that the fresh suit is barred by res judicata. Decide.A. The fresh suit is barred as the restoration application was dismissed. B. The fresh suit is maintainable because dismissal under Order IX Rule 2 is not a decree. C. The fresh suit can only be filed if the court grants special permission. D. The fresh suit is barred as it violates Section 11 CPC.Correct Answer: BCase Title: AMRUDDIN ANSARI (DEAD)THROUGH LRS & ORS. VERSUS AFAJAL ALI & ORS.Explanation: The Supreme Court held that dismissal under Order IX Rule 2/3 CPC (for non-appearance) is not an adjudication on merits and does not constitute a "decree" under Section 2(2) CPC. Thus, res judicata (Section 11) does not apply.Dismissal Of Suit For Default Doesn't Bar Fresh Suit On Same Cause Of Action : Supreme CourtQ 2. X files a suit seeking a declaration of title over a property, claiming ownership through a valid Gift Deed executed in his favor. However, Y (a third party) had earlier obtained a Sale Deed for the same property from Z (the original owner). X does not seek cancellation of Y's Sale Deed in his suit. The Trial Court declares X as the rightful owner and holds Y's Sale Deed as void. On appeal, the High Court dismisses X's suit, reasoning that X must seek cancellation of Y's Sale Deed under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and failure to do so bars his claim. Decide.A. The High Court is correct, X must seek cancellation of Y's Sale Deed, as a declaration of title is insufficient. B. The High Court is wrong, X, not being a party to Y's Sale Deed, need only seek a declaration of title, and the Sale Deed is automatically void if X's title is proved. C. X must first sue Y for cancellation of the Sale Deed before seeking a declaration of title. D. The suit is barred by limitation as X failed to challenge the Sale Deed within three years.Correct Answer: BCase Title: HUSSAIN AHMED CHOUDHURY & ORS. Versus HABIBUR RAHMAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRs & ORS.Explanation: The Supreme Court observed that a plaintiff seeking a declaration of title over a property is not required to specifically seek the cancellation of a sale deed executed by another party over the same property as per Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (“SRA”).Plaintiff Can Seek Declaration Of Title Without Seeking Cancellation Of Sale Deed Executed By Another Party : Supreme CourtQ 3. In 2010, A executes a Sale Deed in favor of B over a disputed property. In 2015, C (the original owner's heir) files a composite suit seeking cancellation of the 2010 Sale Deed (claiming it was fraudulent), and recovery of possession of the property from B. The Trial Court dismisses the suit in 2023, holding it is barred by limitation because the 3-year limitation period under Article 59 (for cancellation) expired in 2013. C appeals, arguing that the 12-year limitation period under Article 65 (for possession based on title) applies since recovery of possession was also sought. Decide.A. The suit is time-barred because the primary relief is cancellation (3-year limit under Article 59), and the clock started in 2010 when the Sale Deed was executed. B. The suit is within limitation because the main relief is recovery of possession (12-year limit under Article 65), and the clock started when C's possession was disturbed. C. The limitation period is 12 years because cancellation and possession are independent reliefs, and the later date governs. D. The suit is barred because C should have filed two separate suits for cancellation and possession.Correct Answer: ACase Title: RAJEEV GUPTA & ORS. VERSUS PRASHANT GARG & ORS.Explanation: The Supreme Court has reiterated that where a composite suit had been filed for cancellation of the sale deed and of possession, the limitation period would have to be adjudged from the primary relief of cancellation which is 3 (three) years, and not the ancillary relief of possession which is 12 (twelve) years.In Suit For Cancellation Of Deed & Recovery Of Possession, Limitation Of 3 Years Applies As Cancellation Is Main Relief : Supreme CourtQ 4. In 2015, Plaintiff 'A' sued Defendant 'B' for declaration of title and possession. Though both parties argued limitation, the Trial Court, without framing a specific issue, dismissed the suit as time-barred in 2018, finding the right to sue arose in 2005. The First Appellate Court upheld the dismissal. In 2025, however, the High Court remanded the case, noting the absence of a specific issue on limitation despite full arguments. Decide.A. The High Court was correct – A specific issue on limitation must be framed, and failure to do so vitiates the entire proceeding. B. The Trial Court's...

Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Yash Mittal

Tags