ADAPAKA SANYASAMMA Vs. VIMARSA PRAKASA VIRESWASWAMI ALIAS VISWESWARASWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard an able and interesting argument from Mr. Ramamurthi for the appellant. The question raised is whether or not the suit is barred by limitation. The trial Court held it was. The lower Appellate Court has held It was not.

(2.) The suit was by a certain person appointed as trustee of a temple, by the Madras Hindu Religious Endowments Board. If from the date of order of appointment time is reckoned the suit is obviously in time. It is said for the appellant that the suit is barred because under Article 134 (B) which is the article that matters there was cessation of trusteeship on the part of one Ramalmgaswami, the prior trustee, as early as 1922, which was the year in which he made his last alienation of the trust properties, that is to say of the temple itself.

(3.) The terms of the third column of Article 134 (B) of the Indian Limitation Act are : "Time from which period begins to run. : The death, resignation or removal of the transferor." The learned Subordinate Judge has observed on the facts of this case, that there is no proof that any of these three events referred to in the third column of the article occurred at any time more than 12 years before the date of suit.