As per case facts, a Probate and Succession Case was initially filed in 2014 for letters of administration regarding a will from 1997, with the testator dying in 2005. Letters ... of administration were granted, but subsequently revoked after a challenge by a sister, leading to the conversion of the case into an original suit. A defendant in that suit then sought to reject the plaint, arguing it was time-barred as the initial petition was filed well beyond the three-year limitation period from the testator's death. The trial court dismissed this application, prompting the present Civil Revision Petition. The central legal question was whether Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, applies to petitions for letters of administration, mandating a three-year filing period, and whether a plaint could be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC if clearly time-barred. Finally, the Court held that Article 137 of the Limitation Act does apply to such petitions, requiring filing within three years. It affirmed that procedural errors in quoting a legal provision do not negate a court's inherent jurisdiction. Finding that the original petition was filed nine years after the testator's death without sufficient explanation for the delay and lacking proper notice to all legal heirs, the High Court concluded that the plaint was indeed time-barred. The Civil Revision Petition was allowed, the plaint rejected, and the connected Writ Petition was deemed infructuous.