Party claiming ownership rights in a property by way of adverse possession must know who the actual owner of the property is.

In the matter of Sh. M. Radheshyamlal vs. V Sandhya and Anr., Civil Appeal No 4322-2324 of 2024, decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 18.03.2024.

Facts of the case–

The original owner of the suit property executed a registered settlement deed dated 01.12.1945 in favour of three persons.

Plaintiff filed a suit on 17/11/1995 claiming ownership of the suit property based on open, uninterrupted and continuous possession for 45 years. In the plaint, it is stated that the original owner died in 1947. The Defendants in the said suit were successors-in-interest of the three persons mentioned above. The 2nd Defendant contested the suit by claiming that the Plaintiff was well aware of the settlement deed but did not disclose it.

Plaintiff’s suit for declaration was dismissed however the Trial Court in another suit instituted by Plaintiff against eviction from the suit property held that the Plaintiff had perfected his title by adverse possession. In appeal, the 1st Appellate Court set aside the finding of the Trial Court that the plaintiff had perfected his title by adverse possession.

Second appeal of the Plaintiff was also rejected by the High court against which the Plaintiff came before the Supreme Court.

Analysis and Conclusion–

The Court noted that regarding the claim of Plaintiff for the declaration of ownership based on adverse possession is concerned, the plaintiff can never succeed unless he proves the plea of adverse possession. Referring to various other Supreme Court’s judgments, the Court pointed out the below-mentioned requisites to prove the plea of adverse possession-

  • “The plaintiff must plead and prove that he was claiming possession adverse to the true owner;
  • The plaintiff must plead and establish that the factum of his long and continuous possession was known to the true owner;
  • The plaintiff must also plead and establish when he came into possession; and
  • The plaintiff must establish that his possession was open and undisturbed.

 

It is a settled law that by pleading adverse possession, a party seeks to defeat the rights of the true owner, and therefore, there is no equity in his favour. After all, the plea is based on continuous wrongful possession for a period of more than 12 years. Therefore, the facts constituting the ingredients of adverse possession must be pleaded and proved by the plaintiff.”

In the present case, the Court noted that the Plaintiff is claiming possession from 1950 and further stated that the original owner died issueless in 1947. It is not the claim of the Plaintiff that even before the year 1947, the Plaintiff or his father were in hostile possession to the knowledge of the original owner.

The Court concluded that when a party claims adverse possession, he must know who the actual owner of the property is. Secondly, he must plead that he was in open and uninterrupted possession for more than 12 years to the original owner’s knowledge. These material averments are completely absent in the plaint. Therefore, there is no proper foundation for the plea of adverse possession in the plaint and the suit for declaration of ownership by adverse possession of the Plaintiff must fail.

SP-07-2024