https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309637 A deed signed under a false belief as to its true character was treated as wholly inoperative, because the apparent execution did not reflect real consent. On that basis, the limitation question under Article 91 could not be decided until the true circumstances of execution were first determined. The courts below had proceeded on the assumption that the suit necessarily required cancellation of the sale deed, but the higher court held that assumption could not stand without a factual finding on how the instrument was signed. The matter was therefore remanded for rehearing and for a finding on execution before the limitation issue was addressed. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 1918 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Sep 2023 12:47:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309637 A deed signed under a false belief as to its true character was treated as wholly inoperative, because the apparent execution did not reflect real consent. On that basis, the limitation question under Article 91 could not be decided until the true circumstances of execution were first determined. The courts below had proceeded on the assumption that the suit necessarily required cancellation of the sale deed, but the higher court held that assumption could not stand without a factual finding on how the instrument was signed. The matter was therefore remanded for rehearing and for a finding on execution before the limitation issue was addressed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 29 Jul 1918 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309637