Adverse possession claim rejected by Supreme Court in property dispute case
supreme Court of India has upheld a judgment that had decreed a suit for possession filed by Murti Shri Durga Bhawani Trust against Sh. Diwan Chand and others. The Trust, which is a registered charitable trust, had filed the suit alleging that the defendants had encroached upon the land forming part of Khasra No. 4833. The defendants had contested the suit, alleging that the plaintiffs had no locus to file the suit, the disputed land was not part of Khasra No. 4833, and they had become owners of the land by way of adverse possession.
The trial court had decreed the suit, ordering the defendants to be ejected from the land. However, the judgment was set aside by the lower appellate court, primarily on the ground that the plaintiffs had failed to prove their title to the land. The High Court upheld the judgment of the lower appellate court, stating that the identity of the land was in dispute.
The Trust had challenged the High Court’s judgment in the Supreme Court, alleging that the lower courts had erred in their findings. The Trust’s counsel had argued that the trial court had rightly decreed the suit after appreciating the evidence, but the lower appellate court had reversed the findings. The counsel had further argued that the defendants had themselves admitted during the course of arguments before the trial court that the disputed land was part of Khasra No. 4833. The High Court had also recorded a categorical finding that Khasra No. 4833 belonged to the Trust, which had not been challenged by the defendants.
The Supreme Court observed that the predecessors-in-interest of the Trust had obtained a decree in their favour in 1965 for the disputed land. The Trust had filed an execution petition against the Municipal Committee for the disputed land in 1974, impleading the predecessors-in-interest of the defendants as respondents. A Local Commissioner appointed in the execution proceedings had stated in his report that the shops constructed by the defendants were built on Khasra No. 4833. The defendants were allowed to raise construction on an undertaking that they would not claim any compensation in case they lost.
The predecessors-in-interest of the defendants had filed a suit against the Trust in 1981, claiming ownership of the land by way of adverse possession. The issue of ownership of the Trust was admitted in the suit, and the court had held that the plaintiffs had failed to prove their adverse possession. The plaintiffs had been partly successful, and a decree of permanent injunction had been passed in their favour restraining the defendants from interfering in their possession except in due course of law.
The Supreme Court observed that the trial court in the present litigation had recorded the statement made by the defendants’ counsel that the disputed land was part of Khasra No. 4833. The court held that the defendants’ plea of becoming owners of the land by way of adverse possession had been decided against them in the earlier litigation. The court further observed that an application had been filed by the predecessors-in-interest of the defendants seeking correction of Khasra Girdawari, wherein they had claimed that they were the owners in possession of the shops since 1950, and the same was part of Khasra No. 4833.
The court held that the appellants were the owners of the land forming part of Khasra No. 4833. The court observed that the report of the Local Commissioner submitted in an earlier litigation had stated that the disputed land was located 434 ft. beyond the nala, and the site plan annexed with the report had not shown any Khasra numbers to identify the land properly. The court held that the report was vague and did not inspire confidence. The Supreme Court also observed that the respondents had unnecessarily dragged the appellants into litigation.
Murti Shri Durga Bhawani Trust against Sh. Diwan Chand and others
