https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309683 A suit challenging conveyance deeds on alleged fraud and seeking possession was treated as barred by limitation because the plaint and annexed documents showed execution of the deeds, acceptance of consideration, and knowledge of the transactions by 2016, or at the latest 2017. The pleaded fraud was treated as fraud as to contents, not as to the character of the documents, so the deeds were voidable and required cancellation. Relief of possession was consequential to setting aside the deeds, so Article 65 of the Limitation Act did not apply; the applicable period was three years under Article 59. As the suit was filed in December 2021, the plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d). en-us Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:27:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309683 A suit challenging conveyance deeds on alleged fraud and seeking possession was treated as barred by limitation because the plaint and annexed documents showed execution of the deeds, acceptance of consideration, and knowledge of the transactions by 2016, or at the latest 2017. The pleaded fraud was treated as fraud as to contents, not as to the character of the documents, so the deeds were voidable and required cancellation. Relief of possession was consequential to setting aside the deeds, so Article 65 of the Limitation Act did not apply; the applicable period was three years under Article 59. As the suit was filed in December 2021, the plaint was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d). Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 18 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309683