ADVERSE POSSESSION

Sl No.	Title	Coram	Date of Judgement	Subject	HeadNotes
31	SMT. BELI RAM SINGH CHOWDHRY & ORS. Vs. STATE OF ASSAM	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	31/10/1995	Assam Acquisition of Zamindaries Act, 1951. Lands-Vesting of in State-Suit for declaration of title to land and possession-Plea a of adverse possession-Held, adverse possession is an en- cumbrance under State Revenue Act and it does not bind Sta	Disposing of the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. The findings of the High Court that the plaintiffs having failed to prove their title to the lands and that it did not form part of acquisition under the Assam Acquisition of Zamindaries Act, 1951 di	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
32	BAPU MAHADU MALI & ORS. Vs. VITHALRAO BHAUSAHEB DESHMUKH & ANR.	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	02/11/1995	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 : Suit for possession-Decreed in favour of rival reversioners -Remained in possession for more than 12 years-Prescribed title by adverse possession- Tenancy agreement with rival reversioners-Hence other party estopp	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : The contention that when a notice was issued to the appellants to pay Nazrana after the abolition of wattan, the appellants had paid the same and thereby became entitled to remain in possession and Sectio	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
33	DR. MAHESH CHAND SHARMA Vs. SMT RAJ KUMARI SHARMA AND ORS	Coram: JEEVAN REDDY, B.P. (J)	01/12/1995	Indian Succession Act, 1925-Section 119-Applicability-Date of vesting of legacy-Property bequeathed by the testator to his wife for life and after her death to his legal heirs-On the date of testator's death son was the only legal heir-Held, legac	On appeal by the third defendant who had purchased the property, partly allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. The present case squarely falls within the four corners of Section 119 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. It fits in neatly into	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
34	MOHAN LAL (DECEASED) THROUGHHIS LRS. KACHRU & ORS. Vs. MIRZA ABDUL GAFFAR & ANR.	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	12/12/1995	Transfer of Property Act, 1882-Section 53(A)-Agreement holder whose suit for specific performance is dismissed-Not entitled to retain pos-session under the agreement-Plea of adverse possession not maintainable. Specific Relief Act, 1963-Section	Dismissing the appeals this Court HELD : 1. Since the appellant's claim is founded on Section 53-A of the transfer of property Act, it is admitted that he came into possession of the land lawfully under the agreement and continued to remain in p	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
35	SADAS1VAM Vs. K. DORAISAMY	Coram: G.N. RAY , B.L. HANSARIA	12/02/1996	Transfer of Property Act, 1882-Section 54-Sale of-Alienation in favour of near relation with understanding that the document not to be acted upon- Sate deed executed without consideration-Invalid. Limitation Act, 1963-Arts. 64, 65-Adverse poss	Allowing the appeals in part, this Court HELD : 1.1. The sale deed was purported to have been executed by M, the father of appellant, for liquidating his antecedent debts on account of two pronotes executed by him in favour of two creditors. M w	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
36	ABDUL QADIR (DEAD) BY LRS. Vs. SMT. MAIMOONA KHATOON (DEAD) BY LRS & ORS.	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	14/02/1996	Custodian of Evacuee property Act, 1950/U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act: Section 7/240-J-Property declared as evacuee property-Thereafter purchased by the appellant-Consolidation proceedings-Appellant claiming to be in adverse pos		Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
37	RAM JANAM Vs. RADHAKRISHNA CHAUBE & ORS.	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	13/03/1996	U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939 : Sections 59 and 61. Bihar and Uttar Pradesh (Alteration of Boundaries) Act, 1968 : Sections 2(a), 3, 8, 26 and 30. Suit-Jurisdiction of Court-Suit filed by appellant seeking declaratory relief against respondent-Appel	Held: High Court was not right in interfering with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below-By virtue of section 26 the U.P. Tenancy Act continued to be applied to the land in question-Appellant held entitled to the relief soug	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
38	PARWATABAI Vs. SONABAI & ORS.	Coram: RAMASWAMY, K.	12/08/1996	Limitation Act, 1963 : Articles 64 and 65. Immovable property-Adverse possession-Suit-Limitation period for-Death of landowner-Widow succeeding to Estate as a limited owner-Thereafter widow executed a registered gift deed in favour of husband in	Held when the plaintiffs asserted their title on the basis of succession to the estate of their father, it was for the appellant to prove as to on which date the appellant's possession has become adverse to the respondents' title-The plaintiff had	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
39	BAKHTAWAR SINGH & ANR. Vs. SADA KAUR & ANR.	Coram: FAIZAN UDDIN (J)	28/08/1996	Limitation Act, 1963 : Article 65 and Section 14. Adverse possession-Plaintiffs withdrew earlier suit with permission-Fresh suit filed-Meanwhile, defendant perfected title by adverse possession- Plaintiff claimed exclusion of time under S.14-Hel	Dismissing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1.1. In the present case all the courts below including the High Court concurrently found that the plaintiffs/appellants failed to produce any evidence to show that the permission to withdraw the suit was	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
40	NAVANEETHAMMAL Vs. ARJUNA CHETTY	Coram: N.P. SINGH, K. VENKATASWAMI	06/09/1996	Limitation Act, 1908 : Article 139-Suit for title and possession-Property sold-Vendor and vendee giving notice to the tenant-Adverse possession claimed by tenant and refusal to pay rent to the vendee-Suit decreed by Trial Court-Confirmed in appeal	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. The findings rendered by the lower appellate court were very well based on materials placed before it and the contrary conclusions reached by the High Court are not sustainable. [588-G] 2. Interferenc	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
41	MADHAVKRISHNA & ANR. Vs. CHANDRA BHAGA & ORS.	Coram: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. FATTANAIK	23/09/1996	Code of Civil Procedure : S. 11-Res judicata-Suit filed-Trial Court held that properties in question not family properties-Decree became final-Properties bequeathed by way of a will-Suit filed for title and possession-Decreed-High Court selling	On appeal held, since there was no claim of hostile title against the owner of the property, the earlier decree operates as res judicata-Subsequent suit filed within 12 years from date of death of the owner-Obviously no adverse possession had been	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
42	KALIKA PRASAD & ANR. Vs. CHHATRAPAL SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS.	Coram: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK	18/12/1996	Suit filed by appellant for declaration of title and for possession of agricultural lands-Plea of adverse possession by respondent-Trial Court finding that the respondent had perfected his title by adverse possession- Ap-pellate Court reversed the	Appeal before Supreme Court-Held the respondent remained, without any interruption, for well over 12 years, in possession in assertion of his own right, that too after the abolition of the estate-Thereby, he perfected his title by prescription sin	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
43	D.N. VENKATARAYAPPA & ANR. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.	Coram: K. RAMASWAMY, D.P. WADHWA	09/07/1997	Karnataka Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 : Scheduled Caste-Allotment of land to by Government-Restriction on transfer- Violation of-Effect-Land purchased by petitioners from original all	Held no interference was called for with impugned decision. Secretary of State v. Debendra Lal Khan, AIR (1934) PC 23; State of West Bengal v. Dalhousie Institute Society, AIR (1970) SC 1778; Danappa Ravappa Kolli v. Gurupadappa Kallappa Pattana	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
44	TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS Vs. K.M. KRISHNAIAH	Coram: S.P. BHARUCHA, M. JAGANNADHA RAO	02/03/1998	Specific Relief Act. 1963 : Section 6 : Suit for possession-Filed after lapse of 6 months from date of dispossession-Held-Plaintiff cannot claim benefit of Section 6 and question of title can be raised by the defendant-Since the title of the def	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD : 1. When a suit for possession is filed by a plaintiff, claiming to be a person dispossessed more than 6 months before the filling of the suit, the question of title can be raised by the defendant and if he	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
45	WALI MOHAMMED KHAN (DEAD) BY LRS, Vs. RAHMAT BEE AND ORS.	Coram: M. JAGANNADHA RAO , M.B. SHAH	23/02/1999	Muslim Law : Wakf-Wakf property-Comprised of graveyard and tombs-R's father was permitted to construct a house in the graveyard for the purpose of conducting Fateha at the tombs in the compound and to provide the Fakirs who gathered there with	Allowing the appeal, this Court HELD ; 1. The permission granted to the respondent's father for construction of a house created a Wakf of a public nature in the house so constructed. Therefore, the respondent's father and the respondent were in	Click here to see Subject, Head Notes, Citation and Judgement
1 2 3 4