Full Name		Full Name is required
Email ID		Email ID required Invalid Email is ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City		City required
Mobile No		Mobile No is required Invalid Mobile No
	* Mobile No is required for verification of identity

Head Note

The Limitation Act, 1963  - Article 60

Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 - Transfer of property by the guardian of ward - The plaintiff/respondents 1 to 5 filed suit against defendants/appellants seeking the relief of partition and for a declaration that the sale deed dated 20.01.2024 and 28.11.2023 executed by defendant No.2 in favour of defendant No.1 are not binding and to set aside the same and also for recovery of possession of the Suit schedule property and for mesne profits - Whether the Suit filed in the year 1989 for setting aside the sale deed dated 20.01.2024 is governed under which Article of the Limitation Act and whether the same is within limitation or not - To consider - The transaction which takes place in the name of the minor in contravention of the 1956 Act and which is not done for legal necessity, such transaction is voidable and unless such a transaction is sought to be impeached or set aside, the question of recovery of possession of that property does not arise - The Supreme Court opined that a quondam minor plaintiff challenging the transfer of an immovable property made by his guardian in contravention of Section 8(1)(2) of the 1956 Act and who seeks possession of property can file the Suit only within the limitation prescribed under Article 60 of the Act. When one of several persons who are jointly entitled to institute a Suit or make an application for the execution of the decree and a discharge can be given without the concurrence of such person, time will run against all of them but when no such discharge can be given, time will not run against all of them until one of them becomes capable of giving discharge - Appeal dismissed.

Topic(s)-