Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Harivansh, (Dead), Through Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Motilal, (Dead), Through Collector, Chhattisgarh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the claims involve declarations and adverse possession over land. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. legal observations highlight the court's reasoning against the plaintiff's claims. (Para 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Since the issue involved in these two appeals are identical and arise from the same judgment and decree dated 04.09.2008 passed by 1st Additional District Judge (FTC), Ramanujganj, District Sarguja (CG) in Civil suit No. 12-A/2002, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
3. The brief facts as reflected from the record are that plaintiff has filed a civil suit before the learned trial Court for declaration of title, possession and permanent injunction of khasra No. 311/2 area 4.275 hectares and khasra No. 203/2 area 5.268 hectare total area 9.543 hectare situated at village Purandih, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Sarguja (hereinafter referred to as suit property) and also for declaration of order dated 19.03.1982 passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ramanujganj as null and void mainly contending that:-
(b) It is also the case of the plaintiff that after two years, Bhukhan handed over possession of suit land to father and uncle of plai
The judgment affirms that civil courts lack jurisdiction over certain land disputes involving aboriginal tribes under specific statutory provisions.
Claim of adverse possession requires open, continuous possession with knowledge to the rightful owner. Plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, resulting in dismissal.
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 ....
The judgment emphasizes the legal principles of adverse possession, including the requirements of open, clear, continuous, and hostile possession, burden of proof, and the need for a substantial ques....
The claim of title by adverse possession cannot be raised as an alternative plea of occupancy rayat, and the requirements for the claim of title as an occupancy rayat and that of adverse possession a....
Adverse possession requires the defendant to prove continuous, open, and hostile possession for the statutory period, which was not established in this case.
The sale deed for the property did not require permission from the Collector, and the suit was maintainable without a declaration of title.
Adverse Possession – Necessary ingredients to constitute adverse possession must be proved in order to perfect title over land.
A claim for title by adverse possession must be clearly pleaded with specific dates and evidence of denial of the true owner's title; mere long possession is insufficient.
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
