Second Appeals (S.A.Nos.184, 185, 191 and 192 of 2020) by common plaintiffs against the common judgment dated 30.07.2019 of the Additional District and Session Judge, Chengalpattu in A.S.Nos.47 to 50 of 2016, reversing the Trial Court's decrees in O.S.Nos.78, 80 and 82 of 2011 and O.S.No.110 of 2013 and dismissing their suits for declaration of title and permanent injunction. The suit properties, claimed under a Will dated 30.03.1969 by the plaintiffs' paternal grandmother Mangammal (life estate to their father Ranganathan Gramani, vested remainder to the plaintiffs), were sold under registered sale deeds dated 07.09.1989, 04.12.1990, 10.12.1990, 28.04.1992 and 04.02.1993 by the plaintiffs and their father. In three of these deeds the 3rd plaintiff was described as a minor represented by his father as natural guardian, and no previous permission of the Court under Section 8 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 was obtained, making those sales voidable at the instance of the minor. However, under Article 60 of Schedule-I to the Limitation Act, 1963 — a specific provision prevailing over the general Article 59 — a ward had only three years from attaining majority to set aside the guardian's transfer; the plaint showed the plaintiffs' ages as 35, 32 and 31 years in 2007, so the suits were filed well beyond that period. There was also no plea that the minors repudiated the sales by unequivocal conduct within time, and K.S.Shivappa vs. K.Neelamma (2025 INSC 1195) was distinguished on that ground. A suit for bare declaration of title, without cancellation of the sale deeds, is not maintainable; the deeds therefore convey good title to the defendants. Second Appeals dismissed with no order as to costs.
