Reasonable time limits on statutory land relief can defeat claims after decades of delay and protect settled title.

Relief under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 was declined because the remedial power was invoked after an inordinate delay of about 30 years. The Supreme Court applied the principle that, even where no express limitation period is prescribed, statutory power to disturb settled rights must be exercised within a reasonable time. Given the long lapse, the transferees' settled possession and dealings with the land, and the absence of a timely challenge, the Court held that the claim was far beyond a reasonable period and refused to unsettle the transaction. The remaining questions of law were not examined.

---

---

Issues: Whether relief under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 could be granted when the attempt to invoke the statutory remedy was made after an inordinate delay of about three decades.

Analysis: The governing principle applied was that where a statute does not prescribe a limitation period for exercising suo motu or remedial power, such power must still be invoked within a reasonable time. The Court noted that settled transactions should not ordinarily be unsettled after long lapse of time, particularly where the transferees had remained in possession, developed the land, and acted on the footing that their title was secure. On the facts, the appellant approached the authorities after about 30 years from the commencement of the protective statute, which was held to be far beyond a reasonable period. The Court therefore found no occasion to examine the remaining questions of law.

Conclusion: Relief was declined to the appellant on the ground of inordinate delay, and the challenge to the respondent's title and possession was not entertained.

Final Conclusion: The decision reinforces that statutory remedies affecting long-settled land transactions cannot be invoked after an excessive and unexplained delay, and that delay alone may defeat the claim without examination of the other issues.

Ratio Decidendi: Even where no express limitation period is provided, power to disturb settled rights must be exercised within a reasonable time, and an inordinate delay can itself disentitle the claimant to relief.

---