Kuppuswami Ayyar, J.

1. The plaintiffs 2 to 5 are the appellants. They are the legal representatives of the 1st plaintiff who died subsequent to the filing of the suit. The appeal is against the decree dismissing the plaintiffs suit. The properties in dispute were purchased by the 1st plaintiff on 1st May, 1924, at a sale held for arrears of rent. The Revenue Court granted a sale certificate on 10th November, 1924. Subsequently there was an application for delivery of possession of the property and we find from a receipt granted to the party with the endorsement of the Revenue Inspector thereon that there was delivery of the property on 12th May, 1925. This suit was filed on 3rd May, 1937, for recovery of possession of the property. There was a building on the site and the defendant has all along been living in it. She pleaded that as she had been in possession for over twelve years the suit was barred by limitation that the delivery of possession on 12th May, 1925, was only a paper delivery in the sense that nothing more was done than the giving of a receipt by the auction-purchaser and it would not interfere with her possession and enjoyment. Both the lower Courts held tha