Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R. P. SAXENA
BHUSHAN LAL - Appellant
Versus
SURESH KUMAR - Respondents
First Appeal 33 Of 1970
Decided On : 11/16/1985
Adverse Possession - Property Dispute - Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Limitation Act - S. 14(1), Art. 64 - The court discussed the property dispute related to the joint Hindu family property and the possession rights of Smt. Kishan Devi. It held that Smt. Kishan Devi did not acquire title by adverse possession and became the owner under S. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Fact of the Case:
The dispute involved a property that belonged jointly to Bhagwan Das and his brother Banwari Lal. The suit was filed by the plaintiff for possession over the property and future damages for use and occupation. The defendants contested the suit, claiming their rights to the property.
Finding of the Court:
The court accepted the plaintiff's version regarding his adoption and the fact that Smt. Kishan Devi did not succeed to the right or interest of Banarsi Das. It also held that Smt. Kishan Devi did not acquire title by adverse possession and became the owner under S. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the possession rights of Smt. Kishan Devi, the validity of the gift deed executed by Smt. Nirma Devi, and the applicability of the Limitation Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Smt. Kishan Devi did not acquire title by adverse possession and became the owner under S. 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. It also discussed the applicability of the Limitation Act and the validity of the gift deed executed by Smt. Nirma Devi.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and awarded costs to the contesting defendants respondents 1 and 2.
R. P. SAXENA, J.
( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against the judgement and decree dt. 28th Oct. 1969 passed by the Civil Judge, Saharanpur in Original Suit No. 12 of 1965 dismissing the suit with costs to, defendants 1 and 2.
( 2 ) THE dispute relates to the following property :- (1) One double storeyed Haveli situated at Mohalla Saraogan in the town of Mangalore, Tahsil Roorkee, District Saharanpur and bearing municipal Nos. 100/1 and 100/6. (2) Five shops including an Ahata situated at Mohalla Tonga stand in the town of Manglore bearing Municipal Nos. 248 to 253 : (3) One grove on plot No. 2320 area 7 bighas 6 biswas in the town of Manglore; (4) One shop in Mohalla Bandtol in the town of Manglore bearing Municipal No. 279; (5) Half share in grove on plot No. 1440 area 1 bigha 5 biswas in the town of Manglore.
( 3 ) THE property in suit along with other property belonged jointly to Bhagwan Das and his brother Banwari Lal. Banwari Lal had a son Bansukh Rai and defendant 5 Mithan Lal is the son of Bansukh Rai. Bhagwan Das had two sons and one daughter viz. , Banarsi Das, Ramji Das and Smt. Pisto Devi, Bhagwan Das died sometime near about 1901 leaving behind his widow Smt. Nirma Devi, two sons and one daughter. Banarsi Das died in 1911. He left behind his widow Smt. Kishan Devi. Ramji Das died on 22nd July 1912. He was succeeded by mother Smt. Nirma Devi.
( 4 ) ON 25-8-1921, there was a partition between Smt. Nirma Devi and Smt. Kishan Devi on the one hand and defendant 5 Mithan Lal on the other, vide copy paper No. 129-Ga1. The property in suit fell in the share of Smt. Nirma Devi and Smt. Kishan Devi.
( 5 ) ON 30th April 1925, Smt. Nirma Devi executed gift deed vide copy paper No. 134-Ga 1 in favour of Smt. Kishan Devi.
( 6 ) SMT. Pisto Devi was married to Asha Ram. Nihal Chand is the brother of Asha Ram. Plaintiff Bhushan Lal is the natural son of Nihan Chand. Sometime in the year 1929-1930, Asha Ram and Smt. Pisto Devi adopted Bhushan Lal.
( 7 ) SMT. Nirma Devi died in the year 1941. She was succeeded by her daughter Smt. Pisto Devi who died on 31-7-1961.
( 8 ) ON 19-4-1960. Smt. Kishan Devi adopted Suresh Kumar defendant No. 1, the natural son of defendant 2 Jagmandar Das and defendant 3 Smt. Prakashvati.
( 9 ) ON 13-2-1964. Smt. Kishan Devi executed will deed paper No. 203 Ka-1 in favour of defendant 1 Suresh Kumar.
( 10 ) SMT. Kishan Devi died in Feb. 1964. On 25th April 1964. plaintiff filed the suit for possession over the property and pendente lite and future damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 100/- per mensem. It was said that Banarsi Das predeceased Ramji Das, that Smt. Kishan Devi had no right in the property and she could not get any right on account of he having been made a party to the partition deed, that the gift deed executed by Smt. Nirma Devi in favour of Smt. Kishan Devi was without any legal necessity and was void, that on the death of Smt. Nirma Devi, Smt. Pisto Devi succeeded to the property, that she permitted Smt. Kishan Devi to live in the house and use the income of the property as she was a widow of the family, that defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are near relations of Smt. Kishan Devi, that by exercising undue influence on her, they got an adoption deed executed by her on 19-4-1960 regarding the adoption of defendant 1, that in fact no adoption took place, that Smt. Kishan Devi was never the owner of the property, that she constructed six shops out of the income of the property, that defendants 1 to 4 entered into possession of the property during the illness of Smt. Kishan Devi who died in Feb. 1964, and that the plaintiff is entitled to the possession over the property as well as mesne profits.
( 11 ) THE suit was contested by defendants 1 and 2 with the allegations that Ramji Das predeceased Banarsi Das, that on the death of Ramji Das, his mother succeeded him, that on the death of Banarasi Das, Smt. Kishan Devi succeeded him, that smt. Kishan Devi obtained possession over the property in pursuance
AI
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
