Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Satya Ranjan Acharjee – Appellant
Versus
Pratibha Paul – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This is an appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, 1908 against the Judgment dated 18.05.2018 by the District Judge, Unakoti Judicial District, Kailashahar in Title Appeal No. 16 of 2017 dismissing the appeal, affirming the judgment and decree by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Unakoti, Kailashahar in T.S. No. 17 of 2016.
2. The brief fact of the plaintiff's (the appellant herein) case inter-alia is that the suit land originally belonged to the father of the plaintiffs namely Sudhir Rn. Acharjee (now deceased). The suit land is homestead ('bastu') class of land & has a drain running from east to west for the purpose of drainage on the suit land. After the death of said Sudhir Rn. Acharjee, the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 inherited the property and their name also got mutated in the khatian No. 634 of Mouja Birchandranagar. Subsequently, on 03-09-1997 the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 sold 0.10 acres of land to the defendant No. 1 vide registered sale deed No. 1-1413 of 1997. Accordingly, the possession was also handed over. Eventually at one point of time the defendant No. 1 started construction on the suit land which as per the plaint, got compet
Adverse possession requires the defendant to prove continuous, open, and hostile possession for the statutory period, which was not established in this case.
The court affirmed that adverse possession requires substantial proof that is open, continuous, and adverse to the true owner for over 12 years, emphasizing legal title must be established by clear e....
Adverse possession requires clear proof of hostile, open, and continuous possession; claims based on mere occupation without valid documents are insufficient.
The court reiterated that for a claim of adverse possession, continuous possession over 30 years must be proven explicitly; mere long possession without asserting hostile title does not suffice.
To claim adverse possession, one must establish continuous, open, and hostile possession for the statutory period, acknowledging the title of the true owner.
To establish adverse possession, one must demonstrate continuous and hostile possession against the true owner with intent to dispossess, which was not proven in this case.
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....
It is settled that necessary ingredients of adverse possession are required to be specifically pleaded and necessary factual foundation in support thereof is to be made out. Equally important is nece....
(1) Recovery of possession – Limitation – Suit based on title where plea of adverse possession had not been raised could not be barred by limitation on ground that it was filed after more than 12 yea....
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
