K.N Rao & Anr vs M/S Composite Securities Ltd & Ors on 28 January, 2022
22. The enquiry in this second appeal is restricted to Articles 68 & 91(a)
and not to Article 4, inasmuch as there is no finding in respect of agency of
Defendant No.2 appointed by the Plaintiffs and Article 4 would only apply
to suits by principals against agents. Therefore, only Articles 68 & 91(a) are
being considered. A perusal of these two articles shows that whenever there
is misappropriation or conversion of a movable property, the Plaintiff can
seek either the movable property back or compensation in lieu thereof. This
is also the settled legal position as per the judgment of this Court in Varuna
Integrated Logistics (supra) where the ld. Single Judge of this Court while
considering Article 68 holds that compensation in respect of
misappropriation of movable property can also be sought. It further holds
that the limitation period in such cases begins from the time the plaintiff
learns in whose possession the property is. The ld. Single Judge also relies
upon various judgments, which the Plaintiffs have also cited.