Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Banka Dei (since deceased) through her LRs – Appellant
Versus
Watuli Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal against trial court's decision. (Para 1) |
| 2. background of the plaintiff's suit. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. trial court's conclusion on adverse possession. (Para 7) |
| 4. arguments presented by the defendant. (Para 8 , 9 , 12) |
| 5. review of evidence and arguments. (Para 11 , 14) |
| 6. court fee valuation and land ownership. (Para 15) |
| 7. adverse possession and title recognition. (Para 18) |
| 8. final dismissal of the appeal. (Para 30) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment & decree dated 1.4.2022, passed by the learned District Judge (Forests), Shimla, H.P., Camp at Rohru, vide which the appeal filed by the present respondent (plaintiff before the learned Trial Court) was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 1, Rohru, District Shimla, was set-aside. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit before the learned Trial Court for seeking vacant possession of the suit land mentioned in para-1 of the p
A claim of adverse possession cannot be sustained if possession stems from an agreement to sell, which legally acknowledges the owner's title.
(1) Recovery of possession – Limitation – Suit based on title where plea of adverse possession had not been raised could not be barred by limitation on ground that it was filed after more than 12 yea....
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 ....
Title and adverse possession claims mutually inconsistent; adverse possession requires proof of specific hostile, open, continuous possession known to owner. No interference with concurrent factual f....
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....
To establish adverse possession, the claimant must specifically plead and prove a hostile assertion of ownership, disclaiming the original title from a particular date, which was not accomplished her....
to approach the Civil Court for adjudicating the title in issue and when the defendant's patta had been cancelled during 1995 merely on the production of certain electricity bills and house tax recei....
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
