State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Bhagwantpal Singh @ Bhagwant Singh Thr. LR’s. (SC)

Possession–Limitation Act, 1963–Art. 65–Decree of Possession–Sus-tainability–I was the owner of land and he donated it to the appellants for the construction of a veterinary hospital in the year 1958 and handed-over the possession–Suit for possession was filed by his son after the lapse of 43 years–Plaintiff very conveniently avoided stating in the plaint as to when the defendants constructed the veterinary hospital–Details of the period when request was said to have been made for delivering vacant possession was also not mentioned–Lack of pleading that when the rights of ownership devolved upon the plaintiff when his father passed away–It is a clear attempt by him at surpassing the bar under limitation law for filing the suit since the existence of the hospital was a fact well known to him since long ago–Municipal Council made financial contribution for construction of the hospital, which is well known to the public of village and plaintiff–Father of plaintiff had never raised the objection which clearly indicated that he had donated the land for construction of hospital–Suit for possession was filed without seeking declaration, so that the suit would not have been further barred by the limitation for that relief–It would be a mockery of justice if the suit is decreed–Merely because the name of plaintiff continued in the revenue record, it could not have confer any title upon him–Impugned judgment passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside.