Hepworth J:

The plaintiff who resides at No. 461 Tranquerah Road Malacca, is suing, as Administrator of the Estate of his father Haji Mohamed bin Haji Hassan sometimes known as Mat Lembing (hereinafter referred to as the "deceased"). The defendant is a property owner residing at No. C2433 Klebang Kechil, Malacca.

The deceased had been the owner of the lands, the subject matter of this action, for many years prior to 1937 in which year he went to Mecca. On his return from Mecca in 1939 he was the subject of an acid attack as a result of which he became blind. The defendant, who was at the time a doctor in practice in Malacca, treated the deceased on this occasion. The defendant had been acquainted with the deceased for many years prior to 1939 but this was the first time he had acted as the deceased's doctor.

In October 1949 the deceased died and the plaintiff, his son, took out Letters of Administration to his Estate. The lands the subject matter of this action were not included in the Petition for Letters of Administration.

The plaintiff alleged that the first time he came to know about these lands not being included in the Petition was in 1957. He searched the register and found they were still registered in the name of the deceased. He then took the steps necessary to get his name registered as proprietor as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased.

The defendant, in whose possession the title deeds of four of the pieces of land are, alleged that the deceased sold him the five pieces of land specified in the pleadings for $1,500 in 1937 before the deceased went to Mecca, that he has been in possession of the land ever since, and that these lands were not included in the Petition for Letters of Administration because the plaintiff well knew this to be the case.

The plaintiff as Administrator is claiming (1) the return and delivery to him of Malacca Statutory Grants numbered 22770, 22771, 22772, 22773 and 20389 relating respectively to Lots 649, 645, 641, 356 and 650 situated in the District of Tanjong Kling in the State of Malacca, (2) damages for the wrongful detention of the same, (3) damages for the wrongful act of the defendant in the erection and continued maintenance of a fence circumscribing the said lands, (4) that the sale alleged by the defendant be set aside and cancelled and/or declared void, (5) for a declaration that the legal title to the said lands is vested in him as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased, (6) that the defendant is a trespasser on the said lands and he do remove the said fence and vacate the said lands, (7) costs, and (8) such further or other relief as may be deemed just by the Court.

The defence was that the defendant was not acting wrongfully but was entitled to maintain the fence and to detain the said title deeds because he was the owner in possession of the said lands. Alternatively the plaintiff's cause of action did not accrue within six years before the commencement of this action and the defendant relied on s. 6(1) of the Limitation Ordinance, 1953. In the further alternative the defendant had been and still was in possession of the said lands for upwards of 12 years and as any claim by the plaintiff was barred by s. 9(1) of the Limitation Ordinance, 1953, and as the plaintiff's right and title (if any) to the said lands were extinguished by virtue of s. 18 of the said Ordinance a fortiori the plaintiff's right and title (if any) to the Deeds claimed was also extinguished. The defendant then prayed that this action be dismissed with costs.

The plaintiff's claims numbered (1), (2) and (7) above were endorsed on the Writ. The plaintiff's claims numbered (1), (2), (3) (7) and (8) above were made in the Statement of Claim. In the Reply the plaintiff repeated the prayers contained in the Statement of Claim and further prayed for claims numbered (4), (5), (6) and (8) above. In his Reply therefore the plaintiff has purported to enlarge his claim by praying in ad