Callow J:

The claim is for surrender of estate and title deeds, for account, and for payment on account.Mr. James Taylor appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Lim Cheng Ean appeared for the defendant.

The facts are that Said bin Mat Amin died in 1918, and on his demise left property consisting of:

(i) Bendang land SO No. 11124, Mukim of Gunong, Area 4r 346 J 20 sq ft;

(ii) Bendang land SO No. 16277, Mukim of Gunong, Area 7r 057 J 20 sq ft; and

(iii)One house.

No application as then made for Letters of Administration, and near relatives of the deceased continued in occupation of the property.It would appear that the Administration of Estates Enactment 1334 (1915 AD) was disregarded.For convenience the genealogical tree of the family is attached and marked "Z".

On the 30 October 1948 the plaintiff sought and obtained a grant of Letters of Administration.At this application the defendant, Ariffin bin Ahmad, Ibrahim bin Arifin, Hamid bin Man, Din bin Abdullah and Bunge binti Mat Akib were present.No objection or opposition seems to have been made.

On the 2 April 1949, Letters of Administration were extracted by the plaintiff and now in order of effect distribution he claims as follows:

(i) for the surrender to him of the estate of the said deceased including the titledeeds of the immovable property thereof;

(ii) for an account to be taken by the Assistant Registrar, of the rents and profits received by the defendant for the period of 31 years in respect of the estate of the said deceased;

(iii)for payment by the defendant of such sum as may be found due on the taking of such account;

(iv)for costs;

(v) for any other or further order as this Honourable Court may think fit.

To this claim the defendant raise the preliminary issue of limitation in accordance with the provisions of Enactment No. 60 (Limitation), pleading s. 26 which reads:

No suit for which no period of limitation is provided elsewhere in the Enactment shall be brought after the expiration of six years to be calculated from the time when the right to sue accrues.

Mr Lim Cheng Ean argued that the defendant is either an executrix de son tort or a coheir in possession.As regards to the latter Mr. Taylor was correct in reply that there is no such position in Muhammedan Law, a coheir unknown.

On the other hand it may be that a cardinal point of this action is an effort by the plaintiff to recover the distributive share which may have been due to his mother, Selamah binti Mat Anum (deceased), although that cannot be apparent on the face of the writ; the suit is by an Administrator in order to administer and distribute.To what extent the order to beneficiaries are disinterested, as Mr. Lim Cheng Ean claims, I cannot yet know.

But the defendant with quite a representative gathering of the family appeared on the 30 October 1948, when Letters of Administration were granted to the plaintiff, and by so doing must be presumed to have acquiesced for there is nothing before me to show dimension.The only inference I can draw is that there was then a desire that the estate of Said bin Mat Amin should be administered and distributed by the plaintiff. I do not think, therefore, that less than a year latter the defendant can resist distribution.The time to have contended the point was when application was made by the plaintiff for the Letters of Administration.

Even then resistance would not have been easy.The parties are Moslems and the distribution of this estate is governed by Muhammedan Law. In that Law limitation does not apply (Rustomji, 5th Ed, p. 1102: Wilson, 6th Edn. p. 261). I do not say that in every case the Limitation Enactment is barred to Moslems, that would made Enactment No. 60 (Limitation) meaningless, for it is an Ordinance enacted for and in a state wherein a large number of the population is Moslem.But with regard to a suit whose object in the distribution of an estate by an Administrator whose appointment was presumably with the assent of the defendant and in o