Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN
Babul Sarma – Appellant
Versus
Mridul Bhagawati – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Heard Mr. U.B. Sarma, learned counsel for the appellants and also heard Mr. P.S. Deka, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Bujarbaruah, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. In this second appeal, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellants have challenged the judgment and decree, dated 22.01.2015, passed by the learned District Judge, Nalbari, in Title Appeal No.5/2013 arising out of the judgment and decree dated 14.08.2013, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Nalbari, in Title Suit No.02/2011. It is to be noted here that vide impugned judgment and decree dated 22.01.2015, the learned District Judge, Nalbari ('First Appellate Court' for short), had upheld the judgment and decree dated 14.08.2013,passed by the learned Civil Judge, Nalbari (trial court hereinafter) in T.S. No. 02 of 2011 whereby the learned Civil Judge had dismissed the suit of the appellants/plaintiffs and upheld the decree passed in the counter claim of the present respondents/defendants Nos.6 and 7.
3. For the sake of convenience and also to avoid confusion, the parties herein are referred to in the same status, as appeared in the title suit, being Title S
Plaintiff's subsisting title must be established to claim possession. Adverse possession claim requires fulfillment of specific requirements.
The court affirmed that adverse possession requires substantial proof that is open, continuous, and adverse to the true owner for over 12 years, emphasizing legal title must be established by clear e....
The court held that the plaintiffs proved ownership through valid Sale Deed; defendants failed to substantiate adverse possession claims due to contradictions in evidence.
The court confirmed that adverse possession can secure title even against invalid transfer documents, provided uninterrupted possession exceeds 12 years and is public, emphasizing the significance of....
Claim of adverse possession requires open, continuous possession with knowledge to the rightful owner. Plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, resulting in dismissal.
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....
A suit for declaration of title without seeking possession is not maintainable under the Specific Relief Act.
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
