"115. From the aforesaid judgments, it is clear that Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (Article 144 of the Limitation Act, 1908) is a residuary article applying to suits for possession not otherwise provided for. In terms of Articles 142 and 144 of the old Limitation Act, the plaintiff was bound to prove his title as also possession within twelve years preceding the date of institution of the suit. The statutory provisions of the Limitation Act have undergone a change when compared to the terms of Articles 142 and 144 of the schedule appended to the Limitation Act, 1908. By reason of the Limitation Act, 1963, in a suit governed by Article 65 of the 1963 Limitation Act, the plaintiff will succeed if he proves his title and it would no longer be necessary for him to prove, unlike in a suit governed by Articles 142 and 144 of the Limitation Act, 1908, that he was in possession within 12 years preceding the filing of the suit. Once the plaintiff proves his title, the burden shifts to the defendant to establish that he has perfected his title by adverse possession. In terms of Article 65 the starting point of limitation does not commence from the date when the right of ownership arises to the plaintiff but commences from the date defendant's possession becomes adverse. Therefore when possession can be said to be adverse is the moot point."
