Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Abdul Mannan Akond S/o. Lt. Mober Akond – Appellant
Versus
Hasina Yasmin And 2 Ors. D/o. Abdul Hamid – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Ms. S. Parveen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
2. This is an application filed under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 challenging the judgment and order dated 30.03.2021 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Tribunal (Land Grabbing), Dhubri in T.S. (L/G) Case No.22/2015 whereby the application filed by the Respondents herein was allowed thereby declaring the right, title and interest over the disputed land and the Petitioner was held to be a land grabber and accordingly liable to be evicted.
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Court below completely erred in law in passing the impugned judgment and order taking into consideration that the Court below did not take into consideration the provisions of Section 2(d) of the Assam Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 2010 wherein the term “Land Grabber” has been defined. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for Petitioner that a perusal of the said Section would clearly go to show that the person who have title or ownership o
It would appear that person who has title or ownership or physical possession over the land, cannot be termed as a land grabber.
"Land grabber" means a person or a group of person who occupy or attempt to occupy with or without use of force, threat, intimidation and deceit, land over which he or they have no ownership, title o....
The proceedings under the Assam Land (Grabbing) Act are specialized to expedite resolution of land disputes, and judicial interference is unwarranted at interlocutory stages.
Possession without lawful entitlement constitutes land grabbing; mere long-term possession does not confer legal title under the Assam Land Grabbing Act, 2010.
The act of land grabbing requires both the fact of illegal possession and mens rea, albeit the intent can be broadly interpreted under the Act.
The court affirmed that continuous possession for over 30 years can establish title by adverse possession, and mere allegations of land grabbing require substantial proof of unlawful occupation.
The Land Grabbing Tribunal can proceed with criminal cognizance under the Assam Land Grabbing Act without determining civil liability first, provided no bona fide dispute regarding property rights is....
The court affirmed that possession without legal title constitutes land grabbing, rejecting the petitioners' claim of adverse possession due to lack of evidence.
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
