O.S.341/2004, Sr. Division,1st Addnl. Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural, City Civil Courts in Bangalore City.for case-study, as to how a senior citizen and ex-serviceman being harassed and humiliated to the core by land-grabbing in Bangalore .
Interest of the public as already decided by the parliament of India in regard to the law of adverse possession. 2 The said law is existing all over the world as it reduces litigation due to the said parameters in the limitation act of India . 3 If this law of adverse possession is changed or abolished it would be unconstitutional would undermine the honorable Parliament of India will and facilitate unnecessary litigation which were already barred by The limitation act of India , 4 it would also facilitate crime as criminals would be hired by the post owner’s who already lost there title by adverse possession to take possession from the current owner , 5 it would also harras lacks of people/family’s in India who have bought properties on oral agreements , part agreements in olden days by just paying money and taking over possession due to High illiteracy rate buying property by virtue of receipt’s or just taking over possession not hiring advocates due to money shortage and just ending up making documents if at all which were not completely recognized , authorized by state and did not / were not entitled to get their names mutated in various government records as morally, constitutionally these transactions were genuine but were not documented as per the current law Due to above said reasons and foreseen circumstances and as time passed the said purchases/people who were in possession of their respected properties also perfected their title by adverse possession as the claimants as per the government records in every state of India already knew that they are no more owners/don’t have right over the said property as such in rural areas and in urban areas people/families are saved by the virtue of adverse possession “The Limitation act )for ignorance of their forefathers/their own ignorance. This law is being practiced all over the world , also it is evident in the Indian evidence act the person in possession is primafaci the owner of the property More “The Concept of adverse possession exist to cure potential or actual defects in real estate titles by putting a statute of limitation on possessile litigation over ownership and possession. A landowner could be secure in title to his land’ otherwise , long-lost heirs of any former owner, possessor or lien holder of centuries past could came forward with a legal clam on the property “ ,but in India we still have this situation in rural parts and as well as in modern cities due to illiteracy, lakhs of legal knowelege,money constraints etc 6)The intention of such statutes is not to punish one who neglects to assert rights , but to protect those who have maintained the possession for the time specified by the statue under clam of right or colour of title’s or even by possession maintaining the property
I HAVE LAND FOR 200SQFT IN AHMEDABAD GUJARAT.BUT THIS LAND IS IN MY POSSESION FOR LAST 20 YEARS AS PER TAX BILL AND LIGHT BILL BUT THERE IS NO MY NAME IN LEGAL GOVERNMENT RECORD SO WHAT I HAVE TO DO?????
Dear Surya, In continuation with my previous reply, he cannot claim adverse possession as he has not fulfilled condition of 12 yrs possession framed in "Adverse Possession.
Dear Surya, The person cannot owner by paying 8 yrs revenue for the land as he is not a bonafied owner. He must have a land record in his name. The land record might be on yours name, though he is illegally possessing land.
can a person claim for adverse possession showing some revenue bills for 8 years on my land kindly reply
With deepest respect to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, I humbly submit that it is not that the law gives legitimacy to a dishonest act of a person taking forcible possession of land belonging to a true owner, but rather that is the effect of the law of adverse possession. It has different connotations. A person even if he is a true owner must come out with his case within a reasonable time which is fixed in India at twelve years. Beyond that period it is increasingly and grossly unfair to put the person in possession to prove that he has the ownership of the same. A person in possession of immoveable property for twelve years without any objection from those who could have proved their title within that time is reasoably expected to believe that his possession will not be disturbed and that his title will not be called into question. Besides, in the meantime he may have sold the property to others on the said basis and new purchasers will then suffer injustice on this account. The question of title like litigation must have some end. Otherwise, you might be called upon to prove the title of your predecessor in title for a hundred years which may be quite impossible. Undoubtedly, if a person has taken forcibly possession for twelve years the law gives him protection. But the law also gives protection to a person who has settled possession of the property, leaving the other to endure the high costs of litigation. Cannot it be then said that the law is protecting the dishonest. With deepest respect to the judgment of the Apex Court I humbly submit that if the law on adverse possession is changed, every case will drag on like the Ayodhya case, and that too by the law of the land.
many neighbour who are powerfull occupy land and make some fencing,or put some temple in connivance with local peaple and try to grab the land,so strict law should be made to avoid illegal possesion
Owner is always a owner. He should not be made to suffer because he cannot make use of his property. There could be many reasons, one of them could be short of funds to manage the property.The other reason may be the viability to make use of the property. The next could be the fear of musclemen or other influential people eyeing his property. Moreover, the adverse possession was the need of the time when there was plenty of land with limited population. The time has changed and now everybody is after the property whether legally or illegally. We should think of making unauthorized possession a punishable offence. This will lighten burden on our Courts where lakhs of such cases may be under consideration.
You are not logged in . Please login to post comments.
Click here to Login / Register
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
O.S.341/2004, Sr. Division,1st Addnl. Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural, City Civil Courts in Bangalore City.for case-study, as to how a senior citizen and ex-serviceman being harassed and humiliated to the core by land-grabbing in Bangalore.