Rabari Hamira Hengol vs Bai Mani Kasala And Anr. on 12 August, 1975
242 and Abdullakhan Daryakhan v. Purshottam Damodar A.I.R. 1948 Bombay 265. I have already pointed out that, even according to the admissions of the defendants, they were in possession of the suit fields as mortgagees and it is not their contention that, their possession had become adverse to the plaintiffs or their mother before the sale deeds were executed. In this connection, it is pertinent to note that, till the year 1966, the land assessment has been paid by one defendant or the other in the name of the father of the plaintiffs, vide Exs. 97 to 104. Possession of the defendants can be said to have become adverse only since the date of the sale deeds which is 2.4.1962. Now, according to the Article 65 of the limitation Act, suits for possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title can be filed within 12 years from the date on which possession of the defendants becomes adverse to the plaintiffs. The present suits have been filed on 7.7.1966. The learned District Judge was, therefore, right in taking the view that Section 59 of the limitation Act was not applicable to the suits and the suits having been filed within 12 years of the date of the sale deeds were within time.