(1) Does the term 'right' used in Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963 denote 'the right to recover possession' of the immovable property, in a suit under Article 65?

(2) Whether the 'right' used in Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963, includes 'title' also?

(3) Can the extinguishment of the 'right' under Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963, confer title on the person in adverse possession of the immovable property?

(4) Can adverse possession be used as a 'sword' or as a 'shield' only?

2. Challenging the concurrent findings entered by the Munsiff's Court, Kochi in O.S. No. 414/2010 followed by those of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kochi in A.S. No.18/2013, the plaintiffs have come up in Second Appeal.

3. The suit is one for declaration that the plaintiffs have perfected their title over plaint B schedule property by virtue of their exclusive, open, continuous and uninterrupted possession and occupation as of right for more than 15 years against the lawful title of the defendants, and also for a perpetual injunction. The plaintiffs have also claimed for a declaration that Ext.B10 partition deed is not binding on the exclusive possession, ownership and enjoyment of the