Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Limitation period for partition of immovable property governed by Article 58 of the Limitation Act, which prescribes a three-year limitation from the date of refusal of partition or from the date when the right to partition accrues. Many cases emphasize that suit for partition must be filed within this period, failing which it becomes barred ["R.Lakshmi Narsimha Rao vs M.Ram Mohan Reddy - Telangana"], ["Gowramma, W/O Sri Tyagarajareddy vs Susheelamma - Karnataka"].
In certain contexts, Article 65 of the Limitation Act applies to suits for possession of immovable property based on title, with a 12-year limitation period starting from when possession becomes adverse to the plaintiff ["KAMALAKSHY AMMA SARADA AMMA (DIED) vs VELAYUDHAN JAYAKUMAR - Kerala"], ["Mahadev, S/o. Bhairu Gavade Since Deceased By Lrs VS Kamalabai W/o. Kallappa Melage Since Deceased By Lrs - Karnataka"], ["Naba Kumar Sarma And Anr S/o Late Adya Prasad Baruah @ Sarma vs On The Death Of Smti. Renu Das, Her Legal Heirs - Gauhati"].
For suits related to alienation or setting aside transactions, Articles 109 and 110 are relevant, providing a 12-year limitation from the date when the alienee takes possession or from when the cause of action arises ["Venkatesh H.L. S/o Late L. Lingappa vs Rangaswamy S/o Late Linganna - Karnataka"], ["AMARSHI SURSANGJI vs HEIRS OF DECD. SHIVABHAI JIVABHAI(DECEASED) - Gujarat"], ["Mantri Building Condominium vs Mantri Building Condominium - Bombay"].
When claiming rights over ancestral or joint family property, the limitation may not be strictly applicable as such suits are often considered a mere formality for division, and the limitation period may not be invoked ["AMARSHI SURSANGJI vs HEIRS OF DECD. SHIVABHAI JIVABHAI(DECEASED) - Gujarat"].
Specific articles like Article 60 govern suits by minors to challenge transfers made by guardians, with a three-year limitation period from attaining majority ["Ashok Kumar S/O Muniyappa @ Roddappa vs Narayana Gowda S/O Muniyappa @ Roddappa - Karnataka"], ["Bandru Mahato vs Hublal Mahato And Anr - Jharkhand"].
Overall, the main reference for limitation period governing the partition of immovable property is Article 58 of the Limitation Act, which sets a three-year period from the date of refusal or the accrual of the right to partition ["R.Lakshmi Narsimha Rao vs M.Ram Mohan Reddy - Telangana"], ["Gowramma, W/O Sri Tyagarajareddy vs Susheelamma - Karnataka"].
Analysis and Conclusion:The primary article governing the limitation period for the partition of immovable property is Article 58 of the Limitation Act, prescribing a three-year limitation from the date when the right to partition accrues or partition is refused. While other articles like Article 65 (12 years for possession based on title) and Articles 109/110 (12 years from possession or alienation) are relevant in specific contexts, Article 58 is the key provision for suits seeking partition.This is supported by multiple judicial references emphasizing the three-year limitation period for partition suits ["Venkatesh H.L. S/o Late L. Lingappa vs Rangaswamy S/o Late Linganna - Karnataka"], ["R.Lakshmi Narsimha Rao vs M.Ram Mohan Reddy - Telangana"].
In property disputes among co-owners, filing a suit for partition of immovable property is common, but timing is critical. Missing the limitation period can bar your claim forever. A frequent question arises: What is the limitation period for partition of immovable property governed by which article? This blog post dives into the answer, primarily Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, backed by key judicial precedents. We'll explore timelines, when the clock starts ticking, exceptions, and practical insights. Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Consult a lawyer for your specific case.
The limitation period for filing a suit for partition of immovable property is governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963. This article prescribes a 12-year period for suits relating to possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title. The period begins from the date when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiffNARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624.
Article 65 states: For possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title - when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff, the period of 12 years is prescribed Sangili VS Jeyakodi - 2024 Supreme(Mad) 1060. Courts have consistently held that partition suits fall under this provision, especially when involving adverse possession or exclusion from joint possession NARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624Vasantiben Prahladji Nayak VS Somnath Muljibhai Nayak - 2004 2 Supreme 618Ratnakar Pralhad Deoras (deceased) through L. Rs. VS Vyankatesh Shamrao Fulmali, (deceased) through L. Rs - Current Civil Cases (2017)I. Joseph Raj VS I. Susai Arul - 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 2276.
For instance, in one ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that for partition based on adverse possession or rights, Article 65 applies with a 12-year limit from when possession turns adverse NARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624.
Indian courts have reinforced this through landmark judgments:
These cases emphasize proving the exact date of adverse possession to check if the suit is within time.
The clock ticks from defendant's possession becoming adverse—meaning open, hostile, and continuous denial of the plaintiff's title. Mere joint possession doesn't trigger it. In partition scenarios:- Co-owners in joint possession? No adverse possession yet.- Exclusion or denial of rights? Limitation begins Vasantiben Prahladji Nayak VS Somnath Muljibhai Nayak - 2004 2 Supreme 618.
One judgment notes: Article 65 thereof reads that for possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title, the period of limitation is twelve years S. Saravanan VS M. Dhanalakshmi - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 3172. This applies even if based on a settlement deed or title document.
While Article 65 is the norm, exceptions exist:- Setting aside a deed: Article 59 (3 years) or Article 113 (3 years from cause of action) may apply NARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624Vasantiben Prahladji Nayak VS Somnath Muljibhai Nayak - 2004 2 Supreme 618.- Administration suits with partition: Depends on the claim's nature; creditor suits might use debt articles (3 years), but title-based partition leans to Article 65 or 110 Sajanbir Singh Anand VS Raminder Kaur Anand - 2018 Supreme(Bom) 694Heena Nikhil Dharia VS Kokilaben Kirtikumar Nayak - 2016 Supreme(Bom) 1755. For example, period of limitation applicable to such a suit would depend on who plaintiff is and what his specific cause of action is Sajanbir Singh Anand VS Raminder Kaur Anand - 2018 Supreme(Bom) 694.- Hindu law alienations: Article 109 (12 years from alienee's possession) for setting aside father's alienation JADE GARDEN PLOT OWNER’S ASSOCIATION VS BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O LATE SHRI V. LASKHMANASWAMY - 2024 Supreme(Kar) 538.- Pre-emption or specific reliefs: Article 97 or others if more specific Santhamma v. Raghavan Pillai - 1991 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 43.
In legal heirship cases, limitation may not start until paternity or heirship is established: The limitation for filing a partition suit does not commence until the legal heirship or paternity is established Sangili VS Jeyakodi - 2024 Supreme(Mad) 1060.
Suits barred if filed post-limitation, e.g., challenging old sale deeds under Article 58 Susheela, W/o. Suresh Marathe vs Suhas Suresh Marathe - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38394JADE GARDEN PLOT OWNER’S ASSOCIATION VS BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O LATE SHRI V. LASKHMANASWAMY - 2024 Supreme(Kar) 538.
Courts prefer interpretations keeping suits alive: If in a situation two articles of law may be wide enough to cover a given right of suit... it should lean in favour of application which would keep right of suit alive Sajanbir Singh Anand VS Raminder Kaur Anand - 2018 Supreme(Bom) 694.
For partition, establish joint ownership and recent ouster.
Article 65 typically governs partition suits for immovable property with a 12-year limit from adverse possession. Backed by consistent rulings NARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624Vasantiben Prahladji Nayak VS Somnath Muljibhai Nayak - 2004 2 Supreme 618Ratnakar Pralhad Deoras (deceased) through L. Rs. VS Vyankatesh Shamrao Fulmali, (deceased) through L. Rs - Current Civil Cases (2017)I. Joseph Raj VS I. Susai Arul - 2022 0 Supreme(Mad) 2276, it protects title rights while barring stale claims. Exceptions like Articles 59, 109, or 113 apply in nuanced cases, as seen in administration or alienation disputes Sajanbir Singh Anand VS Raminder Kaur Anand - 2018 Supreme(Bom) 694JADE GARDEN PLOT OWNER’S ASSOCIATION VS BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O LATE SHRI V. LASKHMANASWAMY - 2024 Supreme(Kar) 538.
Key Takeaways:- Primary Rule: 12 years under Article 65 from adverse possession NARAYAN VS BABASAHEB - 2016 2 Supreme 624.- Start Date: Exclusion or hostility, not title origin.- Exceptions: Shorter periods for deeds or specific reliefs.- Tip: Act swiftly; limitation is strict.
Stay informed on property laws to safeguard your rights. For personalized guidance, reach out to a legal expert.
#LimitationAct #PartitionSuit #Article65
The declaration sought in relation to the 1967 alienations is clearly governed by Article 58 or Article 109 of the LIMITATION ACT , and the limitation period expired decades ago. ... It is thus evident that the plaintiff is not merely seeking partition but is primarily seeking to question alienations of immovable property made more than five decades ago. The suit is fundamentally declaratory in character, with partition#HL....
The present suit for recovery of possession is governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act. The period of limitation prescribed in the said Article is 12 years. It starts when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff. ... Since the starting point of limitation of 12 years prescribed in Article 65 of the Limitation Act is the point when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff, it co....
(Article 109 and 110). The suit for partition does not find mention there. The residuary article 113 prescribes the period of limitation of three years from the date of accrual of cause of action. 4. ... The schedule pertaining to the limitation under the Limitation Act would apply in relation to the suites relating to accounts, contract, decree and instruments, immovable property by a mortgagor or for enforcement of payment of mone....
It is also strange that the trial court has arrived at such a conclusion even after finding that the plaintiff did not take action against the said document during the lifetime of his father and within the period of limitation prescribed in Article 58 of the Limitation Act. ... Therefore, since the registered document, at best is voidable at the instance of the plaintiff, then the declaration should have been sought within the period of limitation prescribed under Article#HL_....
Article 60 of the LIMITATION ACT , 1963, deals with the time limit for a ward seeking set aside a transfer of property made by their guardian. It prescribes a period of three years for the ward to file a suit to challenge such a transfer after attaining the majority. ... The plaintiff and defendants No.1 and 6 are in joint possession of the suit schedule property, and there is no division or partition of the suit schedule property. ... —Where any transaction relatin....
It is well-settled that when an Article in the Limitation Act deals with a specific matter, the period of limitation will be determined in accordance with that Article and other articles will have no relevance in the matter. ... Counsel for the appellant contended that such a suit to enforce a right of pre emption is governed by Art.97 of the Limitation Act. ... It was further contended by him that the present suit is governed by Art.59 as he is give....
... (ii) What is the period of limitation for filing of a suit for administration and partition of the property, both movable and immovable left by deceased? ... contains a prayer for partition and possession of share in a immovable property and referred the following question to a larger Bench : ... “What is the period of limitation for filing of a suit for possession of an movable as well as immovable#H....
Article 65 of the Limitation Act states that “For possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title - when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff, the period of 12 years is prescribed”. ... have filed the suit within a period of 12 years as per Article 110 of the Limitation Act. ... However, under Article 110 of the Limitation Act, 12 years is the period#HL_....
Even assuming that Article 109 of the Limitation Act would have to be taken into consideration, the relief of partition dehors the relief of declaration, even the said period of 12 years expired on 18.07.2007 and 19.07.2007. ... 18.21 Article 109 relates to a suit filed by Hindu governed under Mitakshara law to set-aside the father’s alienation of ancestral property. It is stated to be 12 years from the time when the alienee takes possession of the property....
So the suit was for the enforcement of the payment of money charged upon immovable property and was therefore governed by Article 132. ... Holla is right in his contention that the suit was governed by Article 132 of Schedule I to the Indian limitation Act (1908 ). ... ... ( 4 ) THE Munsiff made a decree only for the rice payable for a period of six years on the unsupportable ground that the suit was governed by Article#H....
Article 65 of Schedule 1 of Limitation Act is extracted hereinbelow:- Description of suit Period of limitation Time from which period begins to run For possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title explanation – for purpose of this article (a) where the suit is by a remainderman, a reversioner ( other than a landlord) or a devisee, the possession of defendant shall be deemed to become adverse only when the estate of the remainderman, reversioner or device, as the case may be, falls into possession ; (b)....
Article 65 thereof reads that for possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title, the period of limitation is twelve years. The instant suit based upon Ex.A-1 is undoubtedly a suit for interest based on title in immovable property. Part V deals with suits relating to immovable property. The period of limitation in such a situation will be 12 years and not three years.
2. What is the period of limitation for filing a suit for administration and partition of properties, both movable and immovable, left by a deceased and whether there will be different periods for such a suit for immovable property and such a suit for movable property?” Whether Article 110 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has any application to a suit for administration of the estate of a deceased?
The period is 12 years when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff. Article 64 of the Limitation Act provides period of limitation for filing suit for possession of immovable property based on previous possession and not on title from the date of dispossession, whereas, Article 65 of the Limitation Act provides 12 years limitation for a suit for possession of immovable property based on title.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
