SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(P&H) 909

VINEY MITTAL
Bhim Singh – Appellant
Versus
Zile Singh – Respondent


Judgment

1. The plaintiffs having lost before the learned First Appellate Court have approached this Court through the present Regular Second Appeal.

2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction claiming that they had become owners of the suit land by way of adverse possession and as such being owners in possession are entitled to protect their possession. The plaintiffs claimed that the land measuring 3 kanals 14 marlas had remained in possession of the forefathers of the plaintiffs and the aforesaid possession was for a period of more than 60 years. In the meantime, consolidation took place in the village and new numbers were allotted in lieu of old numbers. The defendants were trying to dispossess them forcibly by getting revenue record changed, therefore, the suit was filed.

3. The defendants contested the suit and denied the claim of the plaintiffs. It was claimed that the plaintiffs were not even in possession of the suit land. It was also claimed by the defendants that there was some wrong entries in the revenue record which had been ordered to be corrected by the Assistant Collector. Consequently, the defendants claimed that they were owne

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top