1. The verdict in this appeal depends upon the Article in the Limitation Act that is applicable to the facts of the case.

2. The plaint schedule property having an extent of 2 acres 1 cent was in the ownership and possession of the predecessors of the plaintiff. In 1900 Chathunni, predecessor of the plaintiff handed over its possession to the government, which wanted it for the fishermen of the locality to be used as a yard for drying fish and nets. The transaction was subject to the conditions that so long as the property was used by the fisherman for the purpose for which it was given, the owner would not demand any consideration and that if the property was not used for the said purpose or the property ceased to be used for the said purpose, the owner would be entitled to resume possession. The transaction was reduced into writing, which was registered. On 23.4.1910 Sankaran, brother of Chathunni, executed an identical document which also was registered. At the partition that took place in the 'tarwad' of the plaintiff in 1970, the property was allotted to his share. In 1970 the property ceased to be used for the above purpose. The request to the government to give ba