Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
KULDEEP TIWARI
Amrit Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Bant Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kuldeep Tiwari, J.
This is regular second appeal filed by the plaintiffs. Both the parties hereinafter referred to with their respective status before the learned lower Court concerned. It is a decree of reversal.
2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of the suit land with the allegations that they are owners in equal shares of l/6th share of the suit land. Previously, Bhagwan Singh, husband of plaintiff No.l and father of plaintiffs No.2 and 3 was in possession of the suit land. It was further pleaded that taking undue advantage of the absence of the plaintiffs, the defendants, who have their land adjacent to the plaintiffs' land, have encroached upon some portion of the land of the plaintiffs. After having doubt about the illegal encroachment made by the defendants, a demarcation was carried out on 12.11.1984 and it was found that out of khasra No.288/2, an area of (1-0) and in khasra No. 389 an area of (0-16) has been found in illegal possession of the defendants No.l to 3 and out of khasra No. 405/2, an area of (0-18) is in illegal possession of defendant No.4.
3. Upon notice, the defendants filed the written statement denying the pleadings of the plaintiffs and
Possession must be hostile and express to establish adverse possession; mere long possession without knowledge of ownership does not suffice.
Suit for Declaration of his right and title – Dismissal of plea of adverse possession - Defendant / appellant has not proved his possession beyond statutory period hostile to the title of the plainti....
The court established that a claim of adverse possession is inconsistent with acknowledgment of another's title, affirming the jurisdiction of Civil Courts in possession disputes.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that adverse possession claims must be supported by evidence and cannot contradict the findings of previous suits.
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....
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....
A proper re-evaluation of evidence by appellate courts is essential, particularly regarding encroachment claims and the burden of proof for adverse possession, as emphasized under Section 100 CPC.
To establish adverse possession, one must prove continuous possession with animus possidendi; failure to demonstrate this negates such claims.
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
