Adverse Possession: A Concise Overview

Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam.

Ingredients of Adverse Possession

  • (a) hostile animus,
  • (b) denial of title of true owner – admitting the title of the true owner,
  • (c) wrongful dispossession of true owner,
  • (d) placing the date of starting of wrongful dispossession,
  • (e) some overt act,
  • (f) hostile (or notorious) acts:
    • adequate in continuity: nec vi, (‘adverse possession’ for 12 years)
    • in publicity and in extent: nec clam, nec precario.

No Adverse Possession

  • If the claimant has come into possession (of the property) under permissive possession.
  • If the claimant of Adverse Possession does not admit the title of the true owner.
    • (Dagadabai v. Abbas @ GulabRustumPinjari, 2017-13 SCC 705,
    • Raghavan, v. Devayani, 2024-2 KHC 417,
    • M. Radheyshyamlal v. V Sandhya, 2024 INSC 214, pointed out M.Siddiq v. Suresh Das (Ram Janmabhumi Temple-5 J.)

Drastic Change on Adverse Possession

Drastic change has been made, on the law on Adverse Possession, by 1963 Limitation Act.

  • Under the (previous) Limitation Act, 1908 (Arts. 142 and 144), the true owner had to file the suit within 12 years of losing possession (otherwise, there would have been adverse possession).
  • Under the 1963 Limitation Act, it is no longer necessary for the true owner to prove that he was in possession within 12 years of filing the suit (as required, earlier, by Arts. 142 and 144 of the Limit. Act, 1908).
  • Bar of limitation arises, in a title suit (by the true owner), if only the defendants have a sustainable claim of adverse possession, after the 1963 Limitation Act.

Drastic Change Reflected in Court Decisions

  • Drastic change, on the law on Adverse Possession (by 1963 Limitation Act), is reflected in-
    • [Gaya Prasad Dikshit v. Dr. Nirmal Chander, 1984-2 SCC 286,
    • Thakur Kishan Singh v. ArvindKumar, 1994-6 SCC 591.
    • Ramiah v. M. Narayana Reddy,  AIR 2004 SC 4261.
    • T. Anjanappa v. Somalingappa, 2006-7 SCC 570,
    • P.T. Munichikkanna Reddy v. Revamma, (2007) 6 SCC 59;
    • Chatti Konati Rao v. Palle Venkata Subba Rao, 2010-14 SCC 316;
    • Ram NaginaRai v. DeoKumarRai, 2019-13 SCC 324,
    • Mallikarjunaiah v. Nanjaiah, 2019-15 SCC 756, 
    • Uttam Chand v. Nathu Ram, 2020-11 SCC 263;
    • Govt of Kerala v. Joseph, AIR 2023 SC 3988 ]

Effects of the Drastic Change

  • Mere possession, however long, will not be adverse.
  • Even if Plaintiff has knowledge of defendants’ possession (however long) – no relevance.
  • Adverse possession and title claim will not go together.
  • The claimant must (first) admit the ownership of the true owner.
  • An issue as to ‘adverse possession’ necessary.
  • Proper animus (pleading and proof) needed.
  • The ‘mind/attitude’ of the true-owner is immaterial.
  • Title and adverse possession will not go together.
  • Defendants must have relinquished the title claim to prop up adverse possession.

Acquiescence, inaction, etc.

  • The same is the position even if – acquiescence, inaction, etc. on the part of true owner.

Burden is on the Claimant.

  • The burden to prove adverse possession is on the claimant (of adverse possession).
    • [Mohammad Ali v. Jagdish Kalita, 2004-1 SCC 271 ].

Suit on Title by True Owner – No question of limitation

  • unless the defendant substantiates his claim of adverse possession. Because (after the drastic change under the 1963 Limitation Act), mere possession, however long, will not be adverse.
    • [K.J. Abraham v. Mariamma Itty, ILR 2016-3 Ker 98;
    • C. Natrajan v. AshimBai, AIR 2008 SC 363;
    • Indira v. Arumugam, AIR 1999 SC 1549].

How to Subscribe ‘IndianLawLive’? Click here – “How to Subscribe free 

Read in this Cluster (Click on the Topic)

Civil Suits: Procedure & Principles

Book No, 1 – Civil Procedure Code

Principles and Procedure

PROPERTY LAW

Title, ownership and Possession

Recovery of Possession: 

Adverse Possession

Land LawsTransfer of Property Act

Land Reform Laws

Power of attorney

Evidence Act – General

Sec. 65B

Admission, Relevancy and Proof

Law on Documents

Documents – Proof and Presumption

Interpretation

Contract Act

Law on Damages

Easement

Stamp Act & Registration

Divorce/Marriage

Negotiable Instruments Act

Criminal

Arbitration

Will

Book No. 2: A Handbook on Constitutional Issues

Religious issues

Book No. 3: Common Law of CLUBS and SOCIETIES in India

Book No. 4: Common Law of TRUSTS in India

Leave a Comment