Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
Hari Kumhar, son of Late Ganesh Kumhar – Appellant
Versus
Laldeo Kumhar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
This second appeal has been filed against the Judgment dated 08.05.2018 (Decree signed on 21.05.2018) passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II at Ranchi in Civil (Title) Appeal No.46 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the plaintiff/appellant has been dismissed and the Judgment dated 29.11.2016 (Decree signed on 09.12.2016) passed by the learned Munsif, Civil Court, Ranchi in Title Suit No.01 of 2010 has been affirmed.
2. This appeal was admitted for hearing vide order dated 23.08.2023 on the following substantial questions of law:
(i) As the defendant admitted that the ancestor of the plaintiff was the recorded tenant of the suit land, but the finding of the learned trial court that the defendants have failed to establish the surrender of the suit land by the ancestor of the plaintiff namely Dayal Kumhar and the said finding of the learned trial court having not been challenged by any cross appeal or cross-objection by the learned first appellate court and having reached finality; whether the learned first appellate court committed perversity by not decreeing the suit of the plaintiff by allowing the appeal?
(ii)
An entry in record-of-rights is a rebuttable presumption of ownership; without evidence of dispossession, legal claims rooted in such entries remain fortified.
The court upheld the admissibility of historical tenancy documents under Section 90 of the Evidence Act, confirming the plaintiffs' rights over the land despite challenges regarding document validity....
A minor cannot acquire property rights through settlement, and claims must be substantiated by proper documentation to establish title and possession.
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....
The record of rights (Khatian) is presumptive evidence of ownership, establishing Rayati rights until disproved, leading to recovery of possession.
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting ownership or adverse possession, and mere entries in khatian records do not suffice to establish title without supporting evidence.
Mere possession for a long time does not convert permissive possession into adverse possession. The burden of proof rests on the party claiming adverse possession, and unregistered documents may not ....
Tenancy – Mere entry of a non-occupancy tenant is not sufficient to determine tenancy and court has to look to column of rent to determine whether tenancy existed or not.
A plaintiff must establish their own ownership in a suit for title and possession, as entries in revenue records do not confer title.
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
