the issue of limitation. It is contended that
the appellant–defendant was put in possession
of the suit premises initially as a tenant by
the deceased mother in law of the respondent
– plaintiff. The house in question was
allotted to her as an employee of the
Municipal Council. It is submitted that as
per the policy formulated by the Municipal
Council, the employees were given option to
purchase the house in their occupation. The
deceased mother in law of the plaintiff was
not in position to purchase the house. She,
therefore, sold the portion of house i.e.
suit premises to appellant for consideration
of Rs.7000/-. The appellant has paid
Rs.7000/- to mother in law of respondent-
plaintiff towards consideration of suit
premises and also paid Rs.9,000/- to her
mother in law towards occupation charges. In
this background, it is contended that the
appellant–defendant has acquired the right of
ownership in respect of the suit premises by
paying the amount of Rs.16,000/- to the
deceased mother in law of the plaintiff.
Learned counsel submits that the Courts
below have not appreciated the evidence
in its proper perspective and
dismissed the suit as well as appeal. It is
