Limitation Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide
Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1963
Section 27 of Limitation Act: Extinguishment of right to property
Official Bare Act Text
Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary
At the determination of the period hereby limited to any person for instituting a suit for possession of any property, his right to such property shall be extinguished.
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 27
Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963 enacts the doctrine of extinctive prescription, extinguishing a person's substantive title to property upon the determination of the limitation period for instituting a suit for possession.
Statutory Period of Limitation: Section 27 constitutes a major exception to the cardinal maxim that limitation bars only the procedural remedy and does not extinguish the substantive right.
Statutory Rights & Obligations: It provides that at the determination of the period limited to any person for instituting a suit for possession of any property, their right to such property shall be extinguished.
The extinction of the true owner's title operates concurrently with the acquisition of possessory title by the adverse possessor. Under Articles 64 and 65 of the Schedule, the limitation period for recovering possession based on title is twelve years from the date when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff. Upon expiry of twelve years of hostile, open, and continuous possession, the owner's title is permanently extinguished.
Key Landmark Precedents:
Ravinder Kaur Grewal v. Manjit Kaur, (2019) 8 SCC 729: A 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court held that adverse possession under Section 27 can be used as a sword by a plaintiff to file a suit for declaration of ownership, overruling *Gurdwara Sahib v. Jaswant Singh*.
P.T. Munichikkanna Reddy v. Revamma, (2007) 6 SCC 59: The Supreme Court held that adverse possession requires proof of animus possidendi (hostile intent to possess to the exclusion of the true owner); mere long possession without hostile animus does not extinguish title under Section 27.
Legal Commentary:
The *Ravinder Kaur Grewal* ruling revolutionized property law: an adverse possessor whose possession has matured for twelve years can now affirmatively sue for a declaration of ownership and injunction against the world, including the erstwhile true owner. The claimant must establish *nec vi, nec clam, nec precario* (without force, without secrecy, without permission).
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 27
Section 27 of the Limitation Act, 1963 enacts the doctrine of extinctive prescription, extinguishing a person's substantive title to property upon the determination of the limitation period for instituting a suit for possession.
The extinction of the true owner's title operates concurrently with the acquisition of possessory title by the adverse possessor. Under Articles 64 and 65 of the Schedule, the limitation period for recovering possession based on title is twelve years from the date when the possession of the defendant becomes adverse to the plaintiff. Upon expiry of twelve years of hostile, open, and continuous possession, the owner's title is permanently extinguished.
The *Ravinder Kaur Grewal* ruling revolutionized property law: an adverse possessor whose possession has matured for twelve years can now affirmatively sue for a declaration of ownership and injunction against the world, including the erstwhile true owner. The claimant must establish *nec vi, nec clam, nec precario* (without force, without secrecy, without permission).