Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, B.PUGALENDHI, JJ
State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The District Collector – Appellant
Versus
Panthanathammal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
The State of Tamil Nadu was the defendant in O.S No.237 of 1995 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Madurai Taluk. The suit was filed by the respondents 1 to 7 herein for the relief of declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the suit property. The suit was decreed on 11.12.1995. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein filed an appeal before the Principal District Judge, Madurai. There was delay in filing the appeal. Hence, petition for condonation of delay was also filed. The delay was eventually condoned and the appeal was numbered as A.S.No.2 of 2016. During the intervening period, P.R.P Exports rep.by its Partner P.Palanisamy purchased the suit property under Ex.A79 dated 10.06.2005. Hence, the purchaser was impleaded as 8th respondent in the first appeal. Before the first appellate court, additional evidence was adduced and Ex.A77 to Ex.A94 were marked. The first appellate Court dismissed the appeal on 13.03.2020 confirming the decision of the trial Court. Challenging the same, this Second Appeal came to be filed.
2.There was delay of 340 days in filing the second appeal. To condone the same, CMP(MD)No.5444 of 2023 was filed. Notice was or
Adverse possession claims over government properties classified as water bodies are unsustainable due to public trust doctrine and lack of hostile possession.
Claim of adverse possession over government land designated as a water body is impermissible, as long possession does not equate to rights due to lack of animus and legal entitlement.
The court affirmed that the state can claim adverse possession, emphasizing the necessity for plaintiffs to prove their title and possession to succeed in such suits.
The burden of proof in title suits rests with the plaintiffs to establish a superior title; revenue entries are insufficient to confer ownership.
Adverse Possession – Mere possession over a property for a long period of time does not grant right of adverse possession on its own – Surmises, conjectures and approximations cannot serve basis for ....
Continuous possession alone does not establish adverse possession; clear proof of hostility and specific dates of possession are essential requirements.
A claim for title by adverse possession must be clearly pleaded with specific dates and evidence of denial of the true owner's title; mere long possession is insufficient.
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
