Limitation for wrongful detention claims starts when detention becomes unlawful; continuing loss does not create a continuing wrong.

A claim for damages for wrongful detention of specific movable property is governed by the applicable Limitation Act periods for such claims, and time begins when the property is wrongfully taken, injured, or the detention becomes unlawful. The mere persistence of detention or continuing loss does not convert the claim into a continuing wrong. Where the claimant knew of the alleged deprivation on the date possession was taken and filed the counterclaim several years later, limitation barred the claim. Earlier litigation concerning title and possession did not revive or create a fresh cause of action for damages because the wrongful detention claim was distinct from that suit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the counterclaim for damages arising from alleged wrongful detention of movable property was barred by limitation, and whether the alleged detention constituted a continuing wrong so as to postpone the commencement of limitation.

Analysis: The claim related to wrongful detention of specific movable property, not to a continuing infringement of a right of enjoyment in immovable property. For such claims, the Limitation Act, 1963 provides specific periods under Articles 68, 69 and 91, and in any event limitation begins when the property is wrongfully taken, injured, or when the detention becomes unlawful. The facts showed that the alleged deprivation was known on the date when possession was assertedly taken over, and the counterclaim was filed several years later. The earlier proceedings did not create a fresh cause of action for damages, because the claim for wrongful detention was distinct from the earlier suit concerning title and possession.

Conclusion: The counterclaim was barred by limitation and could not be sustained; the finding of the High Court on continuing wrong was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The judgment under appeal was set aside and the appeal succeeded on the limitation issue.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim for damages for wrongful detention of specific movable property is governed by the applicable limitation provision from the date the detention becomes unlawful or the property is taken, and it is not transformed into a continuing wrong merely because the detention and resulting loss persist.

---