DADA JINNAPPA KHOT Vs. SHIVALINGAPPA GANAPATI BELLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the plaintiff who chases a set of concurrent decrees against him with both the courts having refused to declare his title to a small bit of property measuring 16 guntas in relation to which both sides have been at issue all these years in a litigation which appears to have commenced as far back as the year 1967.

(2.) in this court the questions of law that have been formulated for consideration are : (i) Whether on facts held proved by the lower appellate court an inference that the possession of the plaintiffappellant in regard to the subject matter of the suit amounts to adverse possession ? (ii) Whether the cause of action accrued to the plaintiff on 16-12-1S67 or 4-5 1970?

(3.) Having heard Mr. Ajit. J. Gunjal for the appellant and Mr. Kamate for the respondent, it seems to me a finding on the second point is likely to give a quietus to the litigation even without expressing myself on the first point and, therefore, it is I propose to address myself to point No. 2, touching the question as to when the cause of action of the plaintiff arose, whether it was on 16-12-77 or on 4-12-70. It is not disputed that had the cause of action of plaintiff arisen on 16-12-77 the suit out of which this appeal arises would clearly by barred by time but not so if the cause of action is said to have arisen on a later day ie. on 4-5-70 The suit being one for declaration of title and injunction, the Article of limitation applicable would be undoubtedly Article 58, which reads : Description of suit Period of limitation Time from which period begins to run. To obtain any other declaration Three years When the right to sue first accrues On the language of the Article, computing of the period of limitation has to be done tracking it back to the time when the right to sue accrued for the first time.