Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Rasu – Appellant
Versus
Keshav Ram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's predecessor owned suit land by purchase. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendants claim family settlement and adverse possession. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. lower courts decreed possession for plaintiff. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. counsel argue evidence appreciation and sustainability. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. revenue records support plaintiff's title claim. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. defendants' title and adverse pleas inconsistent. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 7. title plea and adverse possession mutually destructive. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 8. defendants' witnesses fail adverse possession proof. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 9. adverse possession requires hostile, continuous possession proof. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 10. family partition unproven absent documents. (Para 34 , 35) |
| 11. section 100 cpc limits factual interference. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 12. appeal dismissed; no substantial question of law. (Para 40 , 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
ROMESH VERMA, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, dated 08.07.2021 as passed by the learned District Judge (Forests), Shimla, H.P. in C.A. No. 08/2019, whereby the appeal preferred by the present appellants/defendants has been ord
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....
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 ....
Possession claims must be substantiated with evidence; the mere existence of an old agreement without action does not support a claim for possession after significant delay.
A claim of adverse possession cannot be sustained if possession stems from an agreement to sell, which legally acknowledges the owner's title.
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....
Claim of adverse possession requires open, continuous possession with knowledge to the rightful owner. Plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence, resulting in dismissal.
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
