https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283886 A claim for conversion of specific movable property, including coal severed from land, was treated as falling within Article 48 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 rather than a different article for wrongful taking of movable property. The distinction was not between honest and dishonest conversion; limitation ran from when the claimant first learned in whose possession the property was. On joint liability, mere status as lessor or general encouragement did not make the appellant a joint tort-feasor: participation in the tort had to be shown. The limitation point failed, but the joint liability finding was set aside, leading to partial success on appeal. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 1928 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2019 14:08:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283886 A claim for conversion of specific movable property, including coal severed from land, was treated as falling within Article 48 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 rather than a different article for wrongful taking of movable property. The distinction was not between honest and dishonest conversion; limitation ran from when the claimant first learned in whose possession the property was. On joint liability, mere status as lessor or general encouragement did not make the appellant a joint tort-feasor: participation in the tort had to be shown. The limitation point failed, but the joint liability finding was set aside, leading to partial success on appeal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Dec 1928 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283886