Back
ABHAY S. OKA, RAJESH BINDAL
Murti Shri Durga Bhawani (Hetuwali) Trust – Appellant
Versus
Diwan Chand (Dead) through LRs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajesh Bindal, J.
1. The plaintiffs are before this Court impugning the orders passed by the High Court in the Regular Second Appeal Nos. 2306 & 2307 of 1997, which upheld the judgments and decrees of the Lower Appellate Court, reversing that of the Trial Court in Suit Nos. 273 and 274 of 1989. The appeals filed by the appellants were dismissed. The orders dated 5.4.2010 passed in Review Application Nos. RA-RS-25C & 26-C of 2010 against the aforesaid appeals are also under challenge.
2. The case has a chequered history. However, the facts leading to the present appeals are being noticed from Civil Appeal No. 6801/2010. However, wherever required, the previous litigation pertaining to the said property shall be referred to.
3. The appellant is a registered Charitable Trust, which is the owner of the land forming part of Khasra No. 4833. A suit was filed by the appellant on 26.5.1982 for possession. It was alleged that the land was encroached upon by the respondents/defendants. The suit was contested by the respondents/defendants raising objection that the appellants/plaintiffs are not the owners of the property in dispute; they have no locus to file the suit; the defendants a
Clear evidence establishing property identity is crucial in ownership disputes.
Permissive possession does not mature into adverse without hostile animus known to owner and proof of continuous, open denial of title for 12 years; no re-appreciation of concurrent factual findings ....
Ownership claims must be supported by existing legal documentation while adherence to limitation statutes may limit recovery rights in possession suits.
Certified copy of Jamabandi entries admissible in evidence under Section 76 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The judgment establishes that continuous possession and proper documentation can affirm ownership, while claims of adverse possession require clear evidence and specific pleading.
Claim of adverse possession requires open, continuous possession with knowledge to the rightful owner. Plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, resulting in dismissal.
The court affirmed that ownership and possession can be established through valid sale-deeds and corroborating evidence, even against claims of unsettled land.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
