Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
Gangawati – Appellant
Versus
State Of M. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal filed after lower court rulings. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments on title and adverse possession. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court's evaluation of adverse possession requirements. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. court's jurisdiction on interfering with factual findings. (Para 7) |
| 5. conclusion that no substantial question of law arises. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
This second appeal is filed by the appellants/ plaintiffs who have filed Case No. (Civil Suit) 202-A/06 in the Court of Second Civil Judge, Class I, Rewa. The suit was dismissed and appeal of plaintiff bearing No. 24-A/07 was also dismissed. The parties have been heard on admission.
2. It was argued that both the Courts failed to see that plaintiffs were having title and possession was sought against the State Government on the ground of adverse possession on the suit property over the last 30 years. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that his case is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Motiram Vs. Pannalal , 2002(1) M.P.L.J. 86 . Attention was drawn to paragraphs 15 and 16, which are as below:-
Title claims and adverse possession are contradictory; plaintiffs must establish the timeline of possession with clear and consistent evidence to prevail in claims of adverse possession.
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 ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that adverse possession must fulfill the criteria of continuity, publicity, and extent, and the title acquired through adverse possession is encomp....
The judgment established that to claim adverse possession, the possessor must demonstrate hostile animus, peaceful, open, and continuous possession, and the abandonment of rights by the true owner. P....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for adverse possession, including the need for peaceful, open, and continuous possession, as well as the animus possidendi to hold ....
The claim of adverse possession requires clear, continuous, and hostile possession, and cannot be established solely based on possession without adequate evidence.
Adverse possession requires clear evidence of hostile intent and exclusive possession, which was not established in this case; mere possession or entries in revenue records do not suffice to claim ad....
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
