Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 1 of 1 (0.29 seconds)

Saraswathi N vs Anniyamma K on 15 October, 2025

27. The learned counsel for the defendant Nos.1 and 4 argued that the limitation begins to run from 18-12-2010 and the suit was filed on 6-4-2015. Therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by limitation but in this regard, the learned counsel for the defendant O.s1 and 4 relied upon (2025) 5 acc 198 in case of Umadevi and others Vs. Anandkumar and others, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court by interpreting Article 110 of Limitation Act held that the partition was took place long ago and it was effected by a registered instrument. The limitation begins from the date of registration of the sale deed. This decision was relied by the advocate for the defendant Nos.1 and 4 to show that the plaintiff and her husband have knowledge about the execution of registered Gift Deed by C.Narayanaswamy in favour of first defendant on 18-12-2010. The true nature of Ex.P.2 was disputed by the plaintiff. At the cost of repetition, the contents of Ex.P.2 reveals that the Executant 27 O.S.No.3189/2015 C.Narayanaswamy declared that the suit property is his absolute property, his wife i.e., first defendant looked after him very well when he was suffering from paralysis. Therefore, out of love and affection, he is gifting the property to her. There are no clauses incorporated in EX.P.3 as stated in para 8 and written statement of the other defendants.
Bangalore District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1