Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

He further submitted that even if Section 49(5) is assumed to apply, it prescribes a strict limitation of twelve years, which is mandatory and not extendable. This position stands settled in Kusum Devi & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors1. and reaffirmed in Krishna Kumar Dodrajka & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand & Ors.2 He had also submitted that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is inapplicable to such original proceedings. Further, the reliance on Section 17 of the Limitation Act on the ground of fraud is misconceived. In view of Section 230 of the Tenancy Act, the Limitation Act applies only to the extent it is not inconsistent. Since Section 49(5) expressly provides that limitation runs from the date of 1 MANU/JH/0372/2004 2 MANU/JH/0187/2017 2026:JHHC:13049 consent, invocation of Section 17 is excluded. Consequently, the impugned proceedings are without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.