Short Note : The suit for declaration of title and possession is in respect of survey No. 40, area 2.36 acres situated in village Labhouli, tahsil Sirmour, district Rewa. The village Labhouli was held in Jagiri rights and the plaintiff Brijbhan Singh was one of the Pawaidars. 2. Before me, the first point for consideration is whether the suit filed is within the period of limitation. The order of the Magistrate, Ex.P-5 under section 145 proceedings was passed on 29-01-1957. The limitation for filing the suit would be governed by Article 47 of the old Limitation Act. Therefore, it is contended that the suit filed beyond the period of three years would be barred. The claim, it is contended, is essentially of his right to possess the land. Held : When the land was under attachment under section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the right of the true owner to the land cannot be extinguished by such attachment howsoever long the attachment continued. The land, even if no suit had been filed, could not be forfeited to the Government nor could it be said that the Supratdar, who was merely a trustee, prescribed title to the land. The right of the true owner to the property on determination of the period of limitation was not extinguished by Article 120 of the Limitation Act. The Supratdar only held the land on behalf of the true owner and the true owner's title still subsisted. 3. Under Article 147 of the Limitation Act, 1963 any person bound by an order respecting the possession of immovable property made under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 has to institute a suit for declaration of his title within three years from the date of final order by the Criminal Court. The suit contemplated by this article is one based on title to the possession of the property and not to the plaintiff's previous possession. The plaintiff, therefore, ought to have filed the suit within the period of three years starting from 29-1-1957. The suit having been filed in 1963 as clearly beyond the period of limitation and ought to be dismissed on this ground. The plaintiff's right to possess the land barred on title is thus barred. ILR 26 Mad. 410, relied on. Appeal allowed.