that it is Hindu Undivided Family in that case Article 109 of the Act of 1963 would come into play and according to it, suit can be filed within 12 years from the date when the alienee takes possession of the property. He also submits that admittedly, alienee is in possession from years together since the years are not mentioned in the plaint, then also if the date of document is considered, it also counts from 23.4.1973 and suit was filed on 18.5.2001 which is after more than 28 years and if the provision of Article 60 are applied, in that case also, according to plaint, the age of respondent No.1-plaintiff is mentioned 29 years and as per Majority Act, 1875, the age of majority is 18 years, therefore, from a bare perusal of plaint, the suit was filed after 11 years on attaining the majority, hence as per provisions of Article 60 of the Act of 1963 also the plaint is barred by limitation. He further contended that Hindu Undivided property is also ancestral property. The term Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) is being used by the Income Tax Department otherwise all ancestral properties are Joint Hindu Family Properties, therefore, Article 109 of the Act of 1963 would be applicable in this matter. He vehemently argued that all these facts are admitted facts over which no evidence is required, however, without considering the same, the learned court below wrongly rejected the application filed by the petitioners and the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside. In support of his submissions, he has relied on the following judgments:
