http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  5891 of 2005

PETITIONER: C. Mackertich & Co. & Anr

RESPONDENT: The Custodian & Ors

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/04/2008

BENCH: B.N. AGRAWAL & G.S. SINGHVI

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT O  R  D  E  R

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5891 OF 2005 With Civil Appeal No.5892 of 2005

       Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.           The Custodian filed a petition before the Special Court (Trial of Offences  Relating to Transactions in Securities) at Bombay, giving rise to Miscellaneous  Petition No.73 of 1998, which has been allowed by the impugned order.  In the said  petition, it has been mentioned that provisions of the Limitation Act shall have no  application to the said petition.  In the written statement filed on behalf of the  appellants, it was asserted that the aforesaid petition filed by the Custodian was  barred by limitation and fit to be dismissed.  It appears that no issue was framed by  the Special Court on the plea of limitation.  In our view, in view of the pleadings of the  parties, the Special Court should have framed an issue on the question of limitation as  well and decided the same along with other issues and the same having not been done,  the impugned order cannot be allowed to be maintained.   ....2/-

- 2 -         Accordingly, the civil appeals are allowed, impugned order is set aside and  the matter is remanded to the Special Court to decide the petition afresh on all the  points, including the question of limitation.  It may be clarified that we should not be  misunderstood to have expressed any opinion one way or the other in relation to the  applicability or otherwise of the provisions of the Limitation Act and the same will be  also decided by the Special Court.