SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(HP) 174

P.K.PALLI
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
KHAZANA RAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. B.B. Sharma, A.A.G.; For the Respondent:Ms. Archna vice Mr. R.K. Gautam, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

P.K.PaIli, J.: This second appeal has been filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh. The machinery was set in motion by the Assistant Collector, Nalagarh on the report having been received from the Patwart that respondent Khazana Ram had encroached upon the land measuring 13 Biswas comprising Khasra No. 84 min. Khata /Khatauni No.37/60. Notice under Section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act was issued to him, in reply he had made out a case that he had not encroached upon the land, rat her he has become owner by way of adverse possession. The Assistant Collector vide impugned order held that the respondent has been able to prove himself to have become owner by way of adverse possession. Appeal filed by the State stands dismissed and this is how this second appeal has been filed.

2. After having heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length and on careful examination of the impugned judgment and the record. I find that the appeal calls for no interference by this Court.

3. Respondent claimed adverse possession since 1958 and a further case has been made out that his possession eversince is continuous, un-interrupted, hostile and to the knowledge of the true owne




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top