Back
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Kisan Vithoba Aakhade (D) Through LRs. – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Tukaram Nerkar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments regarding evidence and corrections (Para 2 , 3 , 6 , 11) |
| 2. dispute over property ownership and possession (Para 4) |
| 3. court's assessment of contesting parties (Para 5 , 8 , 9 , 13) |
| 4. concurrent findings on land possession disputes. (Para 7) |
| 5. findings on possession and title validity (Para 10 , 12) |
| 6. dismissal of appeal due to lack of merit (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
The concurrent findings on facts as entered into by the trial court and the first appellate court, to reject the suit filed, was overturned by the High Court in Second Appeal holding, the reading of the document establishing title; of the plaintiff and the findings on possession; of the defendants, perverse.
2. Shri Satyajit A. Desai, learned counsel for the appellants argued that the sale deed exhibited at Ext. 81, was produced by the plaintiff. Though it showed the extent of 150 square metres, actually as per the revenue records produced by the defendants, as on the date of sale deed the vendor of the plaintiff had possession only of 109.70 square metres. The balance portion was an open space which was in the possession of the deceased 1st appellant, the 8th defendant in
A plaintiff must prove lawful possession to claim an injunction, and reliance on revenue records alone is insufficient to establish ownership of property.
A plaintiff claiming ownership must prove title and ongoing possession; failure to respond to prior sales bars relief, highlighted by limitation law.
Title claims require appropriate documentation; failure to prove ownership and non-joinder of necessary parties renders suit invalid.
Possession follows title; documentary evidence prevails over oral testimony in establishing property rights.
Concurrent findings of fact by trial and appellate courts are upheld unless substantial legal questions arise; plaintiffs must substantiate claims with credible evidence.
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
Mere entries in revenue records do not confer title; to maintain a suit for declaration, a party must also seek possession.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of continuous possession and the lack of evidence to support adverse possession in property disputes.
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
