Back
S. TALAPATRA
Naresh Chandra Deb – Appellant
Versus
Biru Chandra Saha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiffs failed to establish title and cause of action. (Para 1) |
| 2. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 3. adverse possession claims must be substantiated with evidence. (Para 12 , 13 , 19) |
| 4. procedural violations on evidence admission noted. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. court upholds the need for proper documentation to establish title. (Para 17 , 18 , 20) |
| 6. appeal dismissed, confirming trial court's dismissal of suit. (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the plaintiff under Section 100 of the CPC arises from the judgment dated 05.02.2021 delivered in Title Appeal No.39 of 2018 by the District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala. Having noted that the plaintiffs have proved their title over the suit land, but they have failed to prove any cause of action to institute the suit, the Civil Judge who tried the suit denied to give any consequential relief as sought. Reliefs sought by the plaintiffs are as follows:
(a) a decree declaring that the Plaintiffs have right, title and interest over the suit land;
(b) a decree for recovery of possession of the suit land by evicting the Defendants and handing over the vacant possession to the Plaintiffs, and
(c) a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the Def
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting ownership or adverse possession, and mere entries in khatian records do not suffice to establish title without supporting evidence.
Mere possession for a long time does not convert permissive possession into adverse possession. The burden of proof rests on the party claiming adverse possession, and unregistered documents may not ....
A plaintiff must establish their own ownership in a suit for title and possession, as entries in revenue records do not confer title.
The court affirmed the principle that established boundaries take precedence over conflicting land titles, and concurrent factual findings by lower courts are upheld unless proven manifestly erroneou....
A claim of title and adverse possession cannot coexist; plaintiffs must establish their title to succeed in a suit for declaration.
Revenue records do not confer ownership; adverse possession requires clear and unequivocal evidence of denial of title.
The court confirmed that adverse possession can secure title even against invalid transfer documents, provided uninterrupted possession exceeds 12 years and is public, emphasizing the significance of....
The record of rights (Khatian) is presumptive evidence of ownership, establishing Rayati rights until disproved, leading to recovery of possession.
A claim of adverse possession cannot be sustained if possession stems from an agreement to sell, which legally acknowledges the owner's title.
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
