https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195932 An order passed without jurisdiction under a special statute is a nullity and need not be formally set aside before a civil suit for title can succeed. On the accepted facts, the plaintiffs were in cultivating possession and the defendant was only a labourer, so the Compensation Officer lacked jurisdiction to transfer proprietary rights under Section 27(4) of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953. The suit was therefore one for vindication of title to immovable property and was governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, not the shorter periods applicable to suits challenging an adverse order. The suit was not time-barred and the plaintiffs' decree was restored. en-us Fri, 03 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Nov 2017 18:30:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195932 An order passed without jurisdiction under a special statute is a nullity and need not be formally set aside before a civil suit for title can succeed. On the accepted facts, the plaintiffs were in cultivating possession and the defendant was only a labourer, so the Compensation Officer lacked jurisdiction to transfer proprietary rights under Section 27(4) of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953. The suit was therefore one for vindication of title to immovable property and was governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, not the shorter periods applicable to suits challenging an adverse order. The suit was not time-barred and the plaintiffs' decree was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195932