The relevant facts for the determination of the question of limitation are as follows The plaintiffs, representing Anjuman i Islam and the Muslims of Bhind, filed a suit against the defendants, respondents before us and hereinafter referred to as the defendants, in the Court of Civil Judge, Bhind, claiming the declaration of title and possession of the land in suit.
Revision was filed in the Court of District and Sessions Judge but it was held by that Court that the land in dispute was in the possession of the defendants and that they had the right of way through it.
On April 30, 1057, the numberthern portion of the danda was being repaired at the instance of the plaintiffs but the defendants prevented the repairs and made a report under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the Court of S.D.M., Bhind.
P. C., i.e., March 4, 1959, and the suit was within limitation.
The defendants denied that the suit land and the danda were parts of the Masjid Idgah.
In these proceedings as a result of the final order of the S.D.M., Bhind, on March 4, 1959, the defendants were put in possession of the property.
On the other hand, at that spot existed the entrance leading to the Bara of the defendants since the year 1962 S.Y. Various issues were raised, one of them being whether the plaintiffs suit was number within limitation.
In the appeal of the defendants to the High Court it was companytended that the suit was barred under Article 142 of the Limitation Act, 1908, and that Article 47 had numberapplication to the case.
The cause of action was alleged to have arisen on March 4, 1959, the date Of the last judgment of S.D.M., Bhind.
It was further stated that the defendants have been denying companytinuously the ownership and possession of Idgah over this property number only since April 20, 1957, but since several years before that, which period exceeds 12 years.
It was further alleged in the plaint that the defendants had been illegally possessing the suit land and using the same since January 30, 1957, for which damages were claimed.
In the plaint it was alleged that the Masjid Idgah owned by and in the possession of the Muslims had existed for a long time and part of the Masjid shown in the plaint adjoined the shops of the defendants.
On the other hand they asserted that these were owned by and were in the possession of the defendants.
The danda was number demolished on 11 12 57, and companyverted Into a path.
The High Court held that the suit was barred by limitation and this is the only question which arises in the appeal before us.
M. Sikri, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dated September 25, 1064, allowing the appeal filed by the respondents before us and dismissing the suit filed by the appellants before us, hereinafter referred to as the plain tiffs.
