Dear Sir,

The point wise reply to your query is as follows:

1. Mr Vijay Pratap may demand his access to road and he may file the case of encroachment also. 

2. Since he is not in possession of partition papers, he will only claim only for road access. In due process of court, the court may get local commissioner appointed and get the property measurements done.

3. Third party document would be required to proved as genuine in the court. 

4. Depending on the merit of the case, the court may pass any order. 

First you understand that you can’t claim adverse possession.

In P. Lakshmi Reddy v. L. Lakshmi Reddy, the Supreme Court held that the possession of one co-heir is considered, in law, as possession of all the co-heirs. The relevant portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder under: -

But it is well settled that in order to establish adverse possession of one co-heir as against another it is not enough to show that one out of them is in sole possession and enjoyment of the profits, of the properties. Ouster of the non-possessing co-heir by the co-heir in possession who claims his possession to be adverse, should be made out. The possession of one co-heir is considered, in law, as possession of all the co-heirs. When one co-heir is found to be in possession of the properties it is presumed to be on the basis of joint title. The co-heir in possession cannot render his possession adverse to the other co-heir not in possession merely by any secret hostile animus on his own part in derogation of the other co-heir's title. It is a settled rule of law that as between co-heirs there must be evidence of open assertion of hostile title, coupled with exclusive possession and enjoyment by one of them to the knowledge of the other so as to constitute ouster.

It is settled law that one co-owner cannot plead adverse possession against another co-owner unless, as stated earlier, there is an express plea and proof of hostile title asserted to and remained in possession in assertion of that right to the knowledge of the appellants. In the absence of such a pleading and proof, the finding of the appellate court that Bhulan had acquired the title to the property by prescription is clearly illegal.

Form you query it is understand that Partition was done on 100 rupees notary and not registered in registrar office. In such a stage all the person’s have joint ownership in whole property. If anyone wants to separate their property then they will file partition suit or execute partition deed. The notary copy can be use as document when they file a partition suit for getting their share.

Mr. vinay Jagtap can rely on his title deed for proving his case. If he is aware of the map then he can file a petition to direct the court to produce the same by you.

Can Court have right to give alternate road without demolishing my house and without losing any of my land.

It depends on nature of evidence before the court. Mr. vinay Jagtap has right over the property as his predecessors had right in that plot.

1) yes court can pass orders for removal of encroachment 

2) court can direct you to produce original partition deed 

3) you will have to demolish construction done on road 

4) amicable settlement is best option 

Adverse possession and encroachment are different thing. Endorsement is not adverse possession.

If original is in possession of opposite party, court can rely on secondary evidence - photocopy.

Partition can be proved by photocopy of map or third party sale deed map. Both can be refuted.

Court has power to order demolition of encroachment. No alternate road without prayed by vinay in case.

Hello,

1. Yes, Jagtap can legitimately seek court's intervention to remove encroachment. If he questions in court the approval of your structure,it can lead to further trouble for you and favour good claim.
2. Yes, if he succeeds in raising the probability of you or anyone else having access to a document that can help determine the issue before it you can be asked to produce the same. A refusal on your part can lead to the Court drawing adverse inference against you.
3. Any document, regardless of in whose possession it is can be sufficient to prove the issue presented to the Court.
4. This will depend on what prayers he makes to the court and other material factors as to whether other holders would be willing to allow access to Jagtap's property.
5. Adverse possession, unfortunately cannot apply in your case.

1. On the basis of payment of property tax , ownership cannot be challenged . As per the Transfer of Property tax ,the right to an immovable property/land can be claimed on only by a registered document.

- Since,there is an encroachment ,hence Mr. Vinay Jagatap has his right to remove the same after getting court order 

2. As per Evidence Act, Xerox copies are secondary evidence. The primary evidence is the original copy which is admissible in evidence.

- However if he mention before the court that the original is in possession of the opposite party/you ,  and gives notice to produce the original, photocopy may be admitted.

- Further , you will have to also give proof that the said land is under your ownership . 

- Yes, you can deny the same , and can claim the ownership on the ground of adverse possession , if the same is used by you long period , and other party never care for the same during that period. 

3. same reply as 2

4. Yes, it is possible , if there are alternate land for the said use. 

If the way to the land was not necessary that means if it was not a necessary easement, encroachment would be adverse after 12 years of peaceful enjoyment .

But in this case the land is a necessary easement . Therefore it shall remain  valid for ever making encroachment of the same illegal. 

Court can order for demolition of any obstruction on that land.

It has no merit in your favour.

1. Yes he have full right over the land and he can claim it in court. Give him the land as you have already used it for years. 

2. He can get the papers done. Advised that matter be resolved. 

3. Yes

4. Although the court will not order to demolish the house but it will order you to provide road to him on your own expenses. 

1. By filing a suit for mandatory injunction the plot 6 owner  can get illegal structure built over the encroached land demolished and removed and the vacant land can be restored to their possession.

You cannot escape under the shield of adverse possession, in fact this will come under the crime under anti land grabbing act.

2. Mr. Vinay Jagtap can get the copies through court by filing an application seeking court direction to produce the same before court and also he may seek the help of local civic body which has the records of all the proeprty including the road allotted in the plotted layout. You canot disobey the orders of court, or else you have to face legal consequence for contempt of the court order. 

3. Since it is a common partition deed, tht can be produced as evidence.

4. If your encroachment is proved before court, then the court may p[ass an order for demolishing the illegal structure built on the encroached land.

1. Yes vinay jagtap definitely claim his land and ask you to remove encroachments from road and he can also approach court for this issue. 

2. Yes court can ask you to provide original documents available with you to prove your claim on encroached land. Vinay can also make application in court for production of original documents.

3. Yes it will be admissible in court.

4. Enchroaching of land without permission of owner doesn't come under the doctrine of adverse possession. And no one can claim adverse possession over road. 

1  yes

2. It can be done

3. Yes it's sufficient

4. Yes court will give direction

No one has got right to obstruct common passage obstruction of easementary right is itself illegal.

As per the Evidence Act, the original of the document is called the primary evidence. A Photostat copy of a Xerox copy is in the form of what is known as secondary evidence.

court may grant an order for demolishing. 

The right of way is a legal right and cannot be denied to anyone. He may file a civil suit for demarcation of the property and providing him right of way. You cannot refuse the court to provide papers if it asks. He is legally entitled to a way through the encroached land although if you 2 reach an arrangement the court will respect it.

1. Mr. Vinay Jagtap is free to file a suit for mandatory injunction to seek demolition of the illegal structure made on the land.

2. Adverse Possession and Encroachment are two mutually destructive concepts. The plea of adverse possession is not available to someone who has committed encroachment.

3. The certified copies of partition deed can be obtained by Vinay Jagtap from the office of jurisdictional sub-registrar.

4. Court can also direct you to produce any documents before it on an application filed in this regard. If you are directed by the court to produce a document you have to obey the court order.

5. If it is proved that structure so made is unauthorised then court will order the demolition of it, perhaps without giving any alternate structure. Courts do not have to compensate a wrongdoer.

Plaintiff can seek appointment of court commissioner to take inspection of land , extent of encroachment and to submit report to court 

2) court after considering commissioner report , extent of encroachment pass appropriate orders 

Since you can not claim adverse possession for the reason already explained , this shall be logical from all angles  to restore the earlier Right of way instead of finding out another one. 

Yes court can appoint commission depending on the merits of matter

Yes  court can pass such orders

Court will not interfere with other plans to provide road and if vinay case will succeed than encroached portion will demolish to grant passage.

1. Yes, plot no.6 owner have right

2. May be Yes

An Advocate Commissioner can be appointed under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 inter alia for elucidating any matter in dispute

Yes he can because otherwise the land is of no use to him.

 I am sorry to inform you that as you are the encroacher you do not have any rights. The court may order you to leave the land or remove you.

1. Court commissioner can be appointed, if deemed necessary by the court.

2. If he has no alternate land then he may file a suit for declaration of his easementary right on the land and also permanent injunction to ensure that his easementary right is not violated.

Dear Sir,

Please understand that the advocate is bound to protect your interests, but it is prime duties of advocates to inform you the legal position of the issues before the things are taken up further. It is further suggested that on application or otherwise, the Court can empower Court Commissioner for actual measurements, and other etc. issues as per requirements for just decision of the case.  

1. The owner of plot No.6 can very well file a suit seeking repossession of his land encroached by you.

If the advocate commissioner appointed by court makes his report stating that you have in fact encroached his land and built a structure over the encroached portion, the court may pass an order to demolish the structure raised on the encroached portion and handover the vacant land to him.

2. You may have to vacate the encroached portion of land by demolishing the forcibly occupied land without any right over it, the court order may go against you because you have no justification for illegally occupying the land which do not belong to you.

1. As per the information mentioned in the present query, makes it clear that you have encroached upon the land, but that doesn’t meant that you have completely lost it now as you might be saved from law of limitation.
2. I would like to apprise you that it is immaterial as to whom it has not been sold, but what matter is the the time period for which you have using the encroached portion.
3. It is barred for anyone to claim their right if the property or its portion is been enriched and no claim is sought for continuously 12 years then the encroacher gets the right of possession as per law of adverse possession.

1. Yes

2. Yes

- If you want to give him a piece of land for road , then better try to settle the matter amicably. 

We cannot see replies posted by other lawyers and hence not in position to comment 

2) suit would not be barred by limitation as Mr Jagtap was not aware of the encroachment . To save limitation he would take the plea that he became aware of encroachment only recently 

Dear Sir,

Here the limitation may be taken as plea for defence but the same is not forceful because the cause of action is existing and continued. 

If it crosses limitation as per the grounds and his condonation of delay is not allowed then it will be dismissed. If barred he can appeal on merits. Army man is not exempted but his limitation period is more as he is exempted till he is in armed service

No the limitation act will apply to him from the date when he raised the objection. The limitation in case of adverse possession is 12 years from the time the possession gets adverse ie from the time he purchaed and came to know about the same.

1. There is no limitation for this.

If Vinay Jagtap found that his land has been encroached then he can file a suit for repossession even now.

2. Since there is no limitation for this neither it is barred by limitation, you cannot take shelter by misinterpreting law in your favor while trying to justify your illegal act. 

3. You are repeating the same question in different manner.

You will not get any relief if he files a suit for repossessing his encroached land.\

1. No, limitation act will have no effect on this

2. Higher court appeals 

3. May be yes.

1. Not , the limitation period will be counted from the date of knowledge of encroachment.  

2. Yes, he can file a suit for getting the same.

1. It is not barred by limitation.

2. Being in army would grant no privileges to him in civil court.

Continuous cause of action. Not barred by limitation.

And adverse possession cannot take place in case the original owner is serving in the armed forces.