https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461380 A limitation plea in a suit for refund of advance money under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act could not be finally determined as a preliminary issue because entitlement to refund depended on whether the purchaser improperly refused delivery and which party was in breach, matters requiring evidence. The statutory charge created by Section 55(6)(b) was treated as a charge on immovable property, so Article 62 of the Limitation Act applied and provided a twelve-year period from when the money became due. The earlier finding on limitation was set aside, and the issue was left for decision with the other issues after evidence. en-us Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2025 15:43:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461380 A limitation plea in a suit for refund of advance money under Section 55(6)(b) of the Transfer of Property Act could not be finally determined as a preliminary issue because entitlement to refund depended on whether the purchaser improperly refused delivery and which party was in breach, matters requiring evidence. The statutory charge created by Section 55(6)(b) was treated as a charge on immovable property, so Article 62 of the Limitation Act applied and provided a twelve-year period from when the money became due. The earlier finding on limitation was set aside, and the issue was left for decision with the other issues after evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461380