SAIMA PARVEEN vs REKHA BURMAN — 448/2025

Case under Recovery of Money Section 74. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 30th March 2026.

CS - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ

CNR: DLET010039722025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

07-08-2025

Filing Number

2119/2025

Filing Date

07-08-2025

Registration No

448/2025

Registration Date

07-08-2025

Court

District and Sessions Judge, East, KKD

Judge

49-District Judge

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

Recovery of Money Section 74

Petitioner(s)

SAIMA PARVEEN

Adv. Subhash Chandra Lochakia

Respondent(s)

REKHA BURMAN

Hearing History

Judge: 49-District Judge

30-03-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Misc. Arguments

13-03-2026

Misc. Arguments

06-02-2026

Misc. Arguments

22-12-2025

Misc. Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
30-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER

Case Summary: Saima Parveen v. Rekha Burman (CS 448/2025) The court rejected plaintiff Saima Parveen's suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement, finding it barred by limitation. Although the original agreement (January 2020, completion by July 2020) fell within the COVID-extended limitation period ending February 28, 2025, the plaintiff's claim of a fresh limitation period starting March 16, 2025 (based on alleged January 30, 2025 payment and March 15, 2025 extended deadline) failed because neither the payment nor the deadline extension were documented in writing as required by Sections 18-19 of the Limitation Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

11-09-2025
COPY OF ORDER
27-10-2025
COPY OF ORDER
26-11-2025
COPY OF ORDER
22-12-2025
COPY OF ORDER
13-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
23-03-2026
COPY OF ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Saima Parveen v. Rekha Burman (CS 448/2025) The court rejected plaintiff Saima Parveen's suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement, finding it barred by limitation. Although the original agreement (January 2020, completion by July 2020) fell within the COVID-extended limitation period ending February 28, 2025, the plaintiff's claim of a fresh limitation period starting March 16, 2025 (based on alleged January 30, 2025 payment and March 15, 2025 extended deadline) failed because neither the payment nor the deadline extension were documented in writing as required by Sections 18-19 of the Limitation Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Sessions Judge, East, KKD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case