KAYAM ALI @ KALLAN Vs. CHAMMAN BIBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the revisionist.

(2.) This is a defendant's revision challenging the order dated 04.12.2017, whereby the defendant-revisionist's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC in a suit for permanent injunction and for cancellation of a will dated 03.08.1993 has been dismissed.

(3.) The contention of counsel for the revisionist is that the suit filed in the year 2017 i.e. 24 years after the execution of the will, was hopelessly barred by time. The trial Court has rejected the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC granting benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act to the plaintiff. This benefit has wrongly and illegally being granted by the trial Court because the earlier litigation on the basis of which the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act has been granted to the plaintiff was an impleadment application as a defendant, in a suit for cancellation of the same will, filed by a third person, namely Taseer Hasan. It is not the plaintiff case that the will had been challenged before a wrong forum. On the basis of the facts pleaded it can not be said that the plaintiff was prosecuting another remedy, with due diligence.