https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309648 A suit for possession based on title, even when accompanied by a prayer to cancel a sale deed found void through impersonation, is governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, not Article 59. A void sale deed is non est in law and need not be formally set aside before the owner seeks possession. Because the suit was filed within twelve years from the date possession became adverse, the limitation bar did not apply. The courts below erred in applying Article 59, and the dismissal was reversed with the plaintiff's suit for possession and consequential reliefs decreed. en-us Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Sep 2023 21:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309648 A suit for possession based on title, even when accompanied by a prayer to cancel a sale deed found void through impersonation, is governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act, not Article 59. A void sale deed is non est in law and need not be formally set aside before the owner seeks possession. Because the suit was filed within twelve years from the date possession became adverse, the limitation bar did not apply. The courts below erred in applying Article 59, and the dismissal was reversed with the plaintiff's suit for possession and consequential reliefs decreed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309648