When evidence as has been adduced by the parties is taken into consideration, it appears that there is an admission on behalf of Hari Ram (appellant no. 7) that he had visited the village for execution of sale deed on 21.6.1974 but instead of obtaining his signatures on sale deed his signatures were obtained on certain blank paper in the year 1974. However, he admits that though he had not put his signatures on any sale deed, but he was aware of the fact that he was brought to the village for the purpose of execution of the sale deed. It is the contention of the counsel for the appellant that when appellant Hari Ram visited his village in the year 1990 from Madras then he gathered information about execution of the sale deed and thereafter suit was filed in the year 1991 get diluted. In fact, it is an admitted fact that though other appellants are real brothers of Hari Ram, there is plethora of evidence on record to demonstrate that Hari Ram was aware of the execution of the sale deed on 21.6.1974 though he has disputed his signatures and when he attained majority in the year 1975 and, therefore, as per law of limitation, he had ample opportunity to seek cancellation of said sale deed within a period of 3 years of his attaining majority. Since Hari Ram has failed to exercise his discretion seeking cancellation of the sale deed to the extent of his share as he was minor in the year 1974, the suit was clearly barred by limitation. In view of such facts and also the facts that there is admission of the brothers of Hari Ram and of Hari Ram himself that he had been visited the village in 1974 and had, in fact, visited the village on 20.6.1974 when his brothers had informed him that he was brought to the village as they were selling the land in question, it cannot be said that he was ignorant of such transaction till 1990 giving
