Adverse Possession: What It Is & How to Prove It

2021 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 49034

Further, these documents are pertaining to the advese case and not to the ground case and therefore, not relevant.

1994 0 Supreme(SC) 362

possession. ... The High Court was of the view that in order to defeat the claim of the respondent, the appellant had to prove adverse possession over the land in question not only for a period of 12 years but for a period of 30 years, i.e., the period prescribed in respect of the lands belonging to the State Government ... It vests power in Assistant Commissioner, if he is satisfied, that the transfer of any granted land was null and void, to take possession of such land after evicting all persons in #....

It is necessary that the witnesses should speak to specific facts and the question of possession has to be decided thereupon by court. ... It was held that: (1) The contest is between the right of dominium of the plaintiffs and the declaration of adverse possession amounting to prescription by the defendants. (2) The moment title is proved the right to possess it, is presumed. ... The defendant need not prove anything. 'An important feature of the action Rei Vindicatio is th....

In the instant case, the Defendants have manifestly failed to prove the commencement of adverse possession and the continuance of it for over ten years. ... Permissive possession, however long it may be, is not prescriptive possession. ... Permissive possession, however long it may be, is not prescriptive possession. For permissive possession to become adverse possession in order to claim....

Madras High Court - Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

Further, these documents are pertaining to the advese case and not to the ground case and therefore, not relevant.

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 4190

The learned Trial Court has held that the plaintiff had failed to prove possession over the constructed portion of the suit property, but was in possession of the open land in the suit property. ... It must be stated that if possession of a person is as a servant or agent of another, the possession cannot be regarded as individual possession so as to claim decree for perpetual injunction. A possession of servant is possession of his....

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 52819

It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is ‘nec vi, nec clam, nec precario’, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. ... Admittedly, in the instant case the plaintiffs are claiming to be the owner of the suit schedule property by way of adverse possession. Therefore, it is for the plaintiffs to prove that they have acquired a title by way of adverse possession. 47. ... Hence, he submits t....

2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 1599

Even if the defendants in the present suit fail to prove their plea of adverse possession, unless the plaintiffs prove their title as well as possession over the suit property, they are not entitled to declaration and injunction, as prayed for. ... Therefore, it is incumbent on them to prove their title over the suit property. Before the Courts below, the plaintiffs filed only two revenue documents viz., Settlement Jamabandhi Chitta and Adangal Extract for the fasli 1404, relevant to 1....

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 44

It certainly does not mean that because a man has title over some land, he is necessarily in possession of it. ... It certainly does not mean that because a man has title over some land, he is necessarily in possession of it. ... It does not mean that because a man has title over some land, he is necessarily in possession of it. It, in fact, means, that if at any time a man with title was in possession#HL....

The accused led evidence to prove that he was not in possession of the lorry in 1940, and that he had sold it in 1939 to be broken up for scrap iron.  ], that it is open to a registered owner to rebut ' the presumption of possession' ' in any way he wishes'. It is not, I submit, correct to speak of a ' presumption of possession' arising from registered ownership. It is much more than a presumption that arises. ... Perera failed to bear in mind the....

2019 0 Supreme(Cal) 379

He further submits that even assuming that the respondents are in possession the suit property, mere possession does not constitute adverse possession. The mere possession even of a trespasser will not constitute adverse possession unless accompanied by open assertion of hostile title. To prove adverse possession the party is bound to furnish all particulars as to how and in what manner he comes to possession of the property in question. Evidence on record is absolutely silent with regard to the basic ingredient of adverse possession, i.e., open assertion of hostile title.

2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 4117

9. It is well established that a person, who claims title to the property by adverse possession must definitely allege and prove how and when adverse possession commences and what was the nature of his possession." 20. In 2010(5) M.L.J. 491 (Rajamanickam @ Kamal Basha Vs Mohammed Yassin), I have held as follows: "Admittedly, there are so many legal battles between the occupants of the suit property and other adjacent properties even from the year 1981 onwards. Admittedly, the appellant is not a party to the proceedings. To summarise it, a person by holding possession of the....

2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 885

9. It is well established that a person who claims title to the property by adverse possession must definitely allege and prove how and when adverse possession commences and what was the nature of his possession. A Division Bench of this Court in Rangappa V. Rangaswami, A.I.R. 1925 Mad. 1005 has held as follows: "...the question whether possession in any given case has been adverse or not being a question of fact, the requirement of the law is strict and imperative that any plaintiff who seeks to rely upon the acquisition of title by adverse possession, should expressly pl....

2010 0 Supreme(Mad) 859

To summarise it, a person by holding possession of the property for the statutory period can acquire title only when his possession is 1) under the claim of title 2) hostile to the true owner and 3) actual, open, uninterrupted, continuous and exclusive. 9. It is well established that a person who claims title to the property by adverse possession must definitely allege and prove how and when adverse possession commences and what was the nature of his possession. A Division Bench of this Court in Rangappa V. Rangaswami, A.I.R. 1925 Mad. 1005 has held as follows: "...the ques....

2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 4210

To summarise it, a person by holding possession of the property for the statutory period can acquire title only when his possession is (1) under a claim of title, (2) hostile to the true owner and (3) actual, open, uninterpreted, continuous and exclusive. 9. It is well established that a person who claims title to the property by adverse possession must definitely allege and prove how and when adverse possession commences and what was the nature of his possession.