Fraud will

The fraud is fraud.

It has come to notice now.

Plead information is revealed now.

Under Limitation Act no period of limitation is specifically prescribed for filing a probate application. 

If I remember if there is no separate period prescribed under  limitation act, limitation in those cases is 3 years and the case must be filed within 3 years from the date of knowing the fraud, and there must be justification for such delay.  There are several questions of law involved as to possession and enjoyment, alienation etc., for filing a declaration suit.

I am assisting  in such a case of fraud happened 50 years back.  The fraud was perpetraded in 1964 by obtaining expartee decree on forged documents and getting the property registered by a third party.  Still the real owner entered into lease in 1980 and was receiving lease rents from PSU till 1998.  The legal heirs of the culprit filed partition suit in 1999 only after death of the real owner . The legal heirs of the real owner came to know this partition suit and fraud only after legal heirs obtained a decree.  The legal heir of real owner filed a partition suit in 2008, statingthat alienation of property by her son. (Co-parcenor) during life time of Karta, without his knowledge and information is a fraud and it can not bind her share of property.  Both lower and HC decided that legal heir has to file declaration suit with Adv. Court fee and dismissed the case.The suit went upto SC and was not admitted..

During the proceedings, she has conducted inspection of PSU records and found out in 2011 that there was never any consideration and the promissory note was forged and after dismissal and non admission of SC of her earlier partition suit, filed declaration suit in 2015.

None of the legal heirs of culprit are stating or disputing about the fraud, but their argument is that the suit is barred by limitation, as she has filed partition suit in 2008 after coming to know of the fraud and hence this declaration suit can not be filed in 2015.

The IA filed by respondents against real owner legal heir is pending for deciding on preliminary issue of limitation period. The argument of the real owner's legal heir is that she has suspected the fraud in 2008, following it up diligently in her partition suit in good faith in her partition suit, and this declaration suit was filed after getting documentary evidence in 2011, as per HC orders and the period of past suit proceedings must be excluded from limitation period.

There is limitation period in challenging an illegality.

If there is a delay it might be possible to attribute the  cause for the delay  to not being aware of the defect or fraud committed. 

File police complaint for the fraud/forgery e.g. u/s 420,467....

If a fraud/forgery is notice the limitation may be enlarged.

Place all docs and inputs, facts before a very able counsel and understand the options and merits in each option, before proceeding further.

The limitation period begins from the  time the cause of action has arisen. The cause of action could not have arisen if the act of fraud was not manifest. If it can be proved that there was no way that the occurence of fraud could be known earlier , the limitation period shall begin from the time it was unearthed. However if petitioner could have  detected the fraud earlier on the basis of accessible data and documents , the  limitation bar shall be operative from the time it was perpetrated.

As the member who posted the query is an eminent advocate himself, hope some experts respond suitably, as it is presumed that he might have explored all such possibilities and may be seeking further guidance in view of complications in coming out of the limitation barrier.