ARJUN RAMJI MHANKAL Vs. RAMABAI RAOJI VITHOBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is whether where a minor acquired a cause of action to sue for possession of property and died after majority but before the expiry of three years from the date of the cessation of his disability of minority, his personal representative can, although twelve years have expired since the cause of action accrued, institute a suit on the same cause of action at any time within the three years period which had already commenced in the life-time of the deceased. In our opinion the personal representative can maintain such a suit. In such a suit the deceased must be included in the term "plaintiff" for the purpose of Article 142 for according to Section 3 of the Limitation Act " plaintiff" includes any person from or through whom the plaintiff derives his right to sue.

(2.) The title of the quondam minor had not been extinguished by twelve years of dispossession because on attaining majority he was entitled to a further period of three years within which to sue. To use the words of Section 28 "the period limited for instituting a suit for possession of the property had not determined."

(3.) It is otherwise where a minor with the cause of action more than twelve years in existence dies pending disability. In such a case no extended term has commenced for him; therefore the cause of action which would survive up to twelve years from its origin would be extinguished on expiry of that period notwithstanding that the minor had not been able to judge whether or not to sue: for this reason the third clause of Section 7 provided a fresh term for the representative of a person with a cause of action dying under disability.