KHETRA PRAJA RATNA Vs. IPPLILLI RAJENDRA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff and the late Ippilli Rangava (hereinafter to be referred to as 'rangava), were undivided brothers forming a Hindu Joint family. Rangava was the karta. Defendant-1 borrowed some money from late Rangava, Plaintiff filed O. S. No. 6/42 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur, and obtained a money-decree. In execution of that decree he purchased the undivided one-fourth interest. by two sale-certificates, ext. 1 dated 20th February. 1951, and ext 2 dated 10th May, 1951, of the coparcenary properties belonging to defendant-1 and other coparceners who have been impleaded as defendants in this case. He took symbolical delivery of possession of the undivided interest purchased by him. The delivery receipts are exts. 3 and 4 dated 10-10-1951. He filed suit for partition on 10-10-1963. Though a large many defences were taken in the written statement, at the final hearing defendants contested the partition suit only on the ground of limitation. Their case is that the suit is barred by limitation under Article 144 of the old Limitation Act, and that the Limitation is to run from the date of confirmation of the sale when the plaintiff acquired title to the one-fourth undivided interest of defendant-1 in the coparcenary property.

(2.) THE learned Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit upholding the defence contention. He relied upon AIR 1964 Ori-ssa, 43 (Smt. Laxminarasamma v. Ranganavakamma)in support of his conclusion.

(3.) IN First appeal, our learned brother R. N. Misra. J held that limitation ran from the date of symbolical delivery of possession, and not from the date of confirmation of the sale. The symbolical delivery of possession having taken place on 10-10-1951, and the suit having been filed on 10-10-1963, the suit was held to be within limitation. He accordingly allowed the appeal and decreed the plaintiff's suit. It is against his judgment that this A. H. O. has been filed.