AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The appellant/State has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and decree dated 18./10/2006 passed by IV ADJ, Indore in civil first appeal No.33/2006.
Appeal was filed alongwith an application for condonation of delay, which was allowed by this Court condoning the delay.
The respondent-plaintiff has filed the civil suit before the V Civil Judge, Class-II, Indore for declaration of title as well as for permanent injunction to the fact that the respondent-plaintiff is Bhumiswami and in possession of land situated at Village-Kabitkhedi, District-Indore bearing survey No.33/3 rakba 5.80 acre and survey No.33/4 rakba 2.15 acre, totalling rakba 7. 95 acre when his father was in possession over the land since 1947-48, therefore, the suit was filed for declaration of title on the basis of adverse possession. It is alleged that all the documents filed by the plaintiff are forged and fabricated documents. The order of Tehsildar dated 06/02/1999 is also a fabricated document. The entry of the respondent-plaintiff is not recorded in any of the revenue records, therefore, it is prayed that the suit be dismissed.
Learned trial Court framed the issues and dismissed the suit of the respondent-plaintiff against which the respondent-plaintiff has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Court and the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dated 18/10/2006 has allowed the appeal setting-aside the order passed by the trial Court, against the said order of Appellate Court, the present appeal has been filed by the State.
Learned Panel Lawyer for the appellant-State submits that the decree of adverse possession cannot be passed in favour of respondent-plaintiff. Therefore, the learned Appellate Court should have dismissed the suit of the respondent-plaintiff declaring the owner on the basis of adverse possession. Thus, in the light of the aforesaid, he submits that the appeal deserves to be admitted on the substantial questions of law proposed by the appellant.
Learned senior counsel for the respondent has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ravinder Kaur and ors. vs. Manjit Kaur and ors decided vide judgment dated 07/08/2019 passed in Civil Appeal No.7764/2014 and prays for dismissal of the appeal.
In the said judgment Hon'ble Apex Court has held in para 50 as under :-
"Law of adverse possession does not qualify only a defendant for the acquisition of title by way of adverse possession, it may be perfected by a person who is filing a suit. It only restricts a right of the owner to recover possession before the period of limitation fixed for the extinction of his rights expires. Once right is extinguished another person acquires prescriptive right which cannot be defeated by re-entry by the owner or subsequent acknowledgment of his rights. In such a case suit can be filed by a person whose right is sought to be defeated."
Thus, on the basis of aforementioned judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court, nothing survives, therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the Courts below. No substantial question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. The appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.