In case of a suit by a person excluded from a joint family property to enforce a right to share therein, the time from which the period of limitation (12 years under Article 110 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963) begins to run is

In case of a suit by a person excluded from a joint family property to enforce a right to share therein, the time from which the period of limitation (12 years under Article 110 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963) begins to run is Correct Answer When the exclusion becomes known to the plaintiff

Bissoy MCQ

Related Questions

Assertion (A): Where any special or local law prescribes for any suit appeal or application a period of limitation different from period prescribed by the Schedule, the provisions of Section 3 of Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply as if such period were the period prescribed by the schedule.
Reason (R): Where a Special Law prescribes a period of limitation for filing appeal but there is no provision therefore under Limitation Act, 1963, the period of limitation provided under the Special Law must be treated to be different from that under the Limitation Act.
A suit by a person excluded from a joint family property to enforce a right to share therein, under Article 110 of the Schedule, can be filed within the period of limitation of
In a suit for partition, a Memorandum of Family Settlement is filed and on this basis the partition suit is decreed, but even after disposal of the suit the original Memorandum of Family Settlement remains in the file of the partition suit, then in such situation whether in a suit for eviction by one of the original co-owner of a tenant of a shop of the joint property which has fallen to the share of that co-owner as per the decree passed on the Memorandum of Family Settlement, can the certified copy of the Memorandum of Family Settlement be filed and proved as a public document in the suit against the tenant?
In case of a suit for property which the plaintiff has conveyed while insane, the time from which the period of limitation (three years under Article 102 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963) begins to run is
To constitute a matter of res judicata which of the following conditions must concur?
1. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit or issue must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue either actually (section 11, explanation III) or constructively (section 11, explanation IV) in the former suit
2. The former suit must have been a suit between the same parties under whom they or any of them claim. Explanation VI of Section 11 must be read with this condition
3. The parties as aforesaid must have litigated under the same title in the former suit
4. The court which decided the former suit must have been a court competent to try the subsequent suit of the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised. Explanation II of section 11 is to be read with condition
5. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must have been heard and finally decided by the court in the first suit. Explanation V of section 11 is to be read with this condition
In which of the following case, the court has held that limitation period as provided in the Limitation Act, 1963 would extend seven years by virtue of Section 39 of the Limitation Act, since a period of 30 years. Thus making Limitation period for redemption of Mortgage as 37 years
In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the objection of non-impleadment of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit, under section 14 of Limitation Act is
In computing the period of limitation for any suit the time during which the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceedings, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the defendant shall be excluded where the proceeding relates to the same matter in issue and is prosecuted in good faith in a court which from the defect of jurisdiction is unable to entertain it. Exclusion of such period has been laid down in section . . . . . . . . . of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Read the following carefully:
(1) Where once time has begun to run, no subsequent disability or inability to institute a suit or make an application stops it.
(2) In the case of continuing breach of contract or in the case of a continuing tort, a fresh period of limitation begins to run at every moment of time during which the breach or the tort, as the case may be, continues.
Of the above:
If any period of limitation, is to be excluded from the prescribed period of limitation, the party necessary has to satisfy and of appropriate provisions in Sections . . . . . . . . to . . . . . . . . of the Limitation Act, 1963.