Back
A.P.THAKER
Navinchandra Somchand, (died) thr. his heirs – Appellant
Versus
Heirs of Somchand Bechardas – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
A.P. Thaker, J.—The original defendants have filed the present Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree passed by the 3rd Joint Civil Judge Junior Division, Regular Civil Suit No.350 of 1978 which came to be confirmed by the learned Assistant Judge, Surat by his judgment and decree dated 28.03.1988 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.269 of 1984.
2. The appellants are original defendant and the respondents are the original plaintiff before the Court below. For the brevity and convenience, the parties are referred to in this judgment as per their status before the lower Courts i.e. defendant and plaintiff.
3. The plaintiff has filed Regular Civil Suit No.350 of 1980 in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Surat inter alia for declaration that he is the owner of the suit property as well as for possession of the suit property and for permanent injunction against the defendant. It was contended by the plaintiff that the suit property is self acquired property purchased from his personal fund; that the defendants have no right, title and interest in the suit property; that the defendant nos.1 and 2 are the sons of th
Plea of adverse possession raised by defendants against their own father cannot be accepted.
Objections to the admissibility of evidence should be raised when the evidence is tendered and cannot be raised subsequently. The plea of adverse possession must be pleaded with proper particulars an....
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting an oral sale, and clear, unimpeachable evidence is required to establish such a claim.
The burden of proof lies with the party claiming specific performance, and the evidence presented must be sufficient to establish legal rights and ownership of the property.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of valid documentation for establishing property ownership and highlights the contradictory nature of claiming adverse possession against one's own property.
The court affirmed that the state can claim adverse possession, emphasizing the necessity for plaintiffs to prove their title and possession to succeed in such suits.
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
