Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)

Section: 142

  Limitation Act (IX of 1908)----Art. 142-Suit for partition Plaintiff attaining majority in 1930, and filing partition suit in May 1950, basing his claim on title and dispossession by defendant Possession of plaintiff within 12 years not proved-Suit, held, was governed by Art. 142 and therefore barred by time.   Bindhyachal Chandv. Ram Gharib Chand A I R 1934 All. 993; Doumal Ramumal v. Asharam Shewaran I L R 1939 Kar. 793; Behari Lal v. Narain Das A I R 1935 Lah. 475; Karim Bakhsh v. Shadi I L R 1938 Lah. 558; Mulla Haider Hussain v. Muhammad Subhan Khan A I R .1940 All. 428; Sher v. Phuman Ram 42 P L R 497 and Dipnarain Rai v. Pundeo Rai A I R 1947 Pat. 99 ref.   Dates of hearing: 11th, 18th and 19th January 1965.   JUDGMENT   WAHIDUDDIN AHMED, J.----This is a Letters Patent Appeal 'from the judgment of a learned Single Judge on the original side of this Court in Suit No. 282/1950, dated 6th June, 1961. By this judgment the suit of the appellant for of the property in dispute was dismissed.   The dispute between the parties is in respect of four agricultural plots of land bearing Survey Nos. 580, 611,612 and 641 situated in Deh. Thano Malir, measuring about 27 Jiribs. The parties are related to each other through Mukhi Bhanji their common ancestor who died on 20th May 1918, two sons Mohammad and Devji. Devji died on the 1st of November, 1918. Mohammad died later on 20th July 1932. The appellant is the son of Devji and the respondents are the grand-sons of Mohammad by his son Ismail. The suit was filed against Ismail, who died on 12th September, 1950. The respondents were impleaded as his legal representatives during the pendency of the suit.   The appellant's case as set out in the plaint is that the properties in dispute are jointproperties. The parties were governed by Hindu Law in matter of succession and inheritance. They had joint business. Respondents' grand-father, after the death of the appellant's father, was managing the above-mentioned joint properties as head of the family, and after his death in 1932, Ismail, his son, in that capacity managed the properties. He alleged that Ismail…