Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
Y.V. Prasanna Kumar – Appellant
Versus
S. Venkateshwar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J.
1. Aggrieved by the Judgment and Decree Dated 29-04-2010 in OS No. 67 of 2005, on the file of the I Addl. Chief Judge, City Civil Courts, Secunderabad, this Appeal is preferred by the defendants-appellants.
2. For convenience sake, parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.
3. Originally, the suit was filed by respondents - plaintiffs for recovery of possession of suit schedule land admeasuring 13 square yards along with two rooms in dilapidated condition and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendants not to block the entry for ingress and egress of plaintiffs in respect of suit schedule property bearing premises No. 28 and 29 situated at Picket, Secunderabad. It is stated, plaintiffs are enjoying the suit property as absolute owners and also the legal heirs of their father S.Hanumantha Rao. As they have been pre-occupied by their works and they are not in a position to look after the suit schedule property, they executed GPA in favour of one J. Ajay Babu to look after the suit schedule property and plaintiffs are paying taxes to the Cantonment Board regularly.
According to plaintiffs, the suit property is in a dilapidated condition an
To claim adverse possession, one must establish continuous, open, and hostile possession for the statutory period, acknowledging the title of the true owner.
The court affirmed that ownership claims must be supported by documentary evidence, and the principle of preponderance of probability governs determinations of title and tenancy.
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting the affirmative issue, and adverse possession requires the party to set up their own adverse title and remain in exclusive possession hostile to the tr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the possession follows title, and in cases of vacant property, the person able to establish title is considered to be in possession. The court....
Unregistered relinquishment deeds cannot establish ownership, and adverse possession claims require clear proof of exclusive possession and continuity which the plaintiff failed to provide.
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.
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
