Two brothers "A" and "B" have purchased adjacent plots let's say "P1" measuring 24*110 by "A" and "P2" measuring 24*110 by "B" vide registered sale deed in 1990 so both are self-acquired properties. Then 'A' obtained licence for constructing 18*60 in his plot and started construction with a common wall in between the plots so the plan was to leave the passage of 6 feet on the extreme ends of both plots so this can be used to access the remaining plot area. Later a few months after "A" started construction, brother "B" also started construction in his plot keeping the common wall which is exactly in the middle of both the plots for the extent of 18*60 so he also has 6 feet passage in his plot to access remaining plot but he didn't obtain any licence for his house. both houses were constructed in 1990 Now brother "B" who was in possession of the house and was paying tax only for the plot till he transferred his property to his son who is living in Bangalore in 2021 vide registered gift deed, and he went to live in his village. The son of "B" later approached the municipality and the municipality officials regularized the construction as per the Karnataka Muncipal act Levying a penalty of 2 times the tax for the building from 1990 and making a katha in his name adding house in the katha. Now brother "A" has filed a suit before DC asking for cancellation of katha made in favour of "B"'s SON stating the vacant plot in the gift deed and the entire house belongs to him and he has constructed it, he has also tresspassed the property and placed his friend in the house when "B"s son is out of town and stating he is in possession of the house since 1990 and he was renting this house from then. Later a rectification deed was executed by "B" stating he constructed the house without obtaining a licence in his plot, this was done after regularization and trespass happened. Brother "A" has colluded with officials and made alterations to his Katha stating his plot is 24*110 and the house is to the extent of 24*60 .. whereas, in reality, he has only 18*110 in his plot.He doesn't hold a e-katha and only a handwritten katha showing this measurement which is also in muncipal records . What is the remedy to asking officials to retain "A" original records in katha? Now DC has called for records and given a date for the hearing, can DC cancel this katha made in the name of "B"'s SON? Does DC have powers to cancel the Katha which is already made based on the registered gift deed,e-katha is also available and a penalty of nearly 2.5 lks is already paid and tax is paid to date. B's SON have filed a eviction suit against "A"'s friend who has trespassed and an FIR is also lodged . The concern is about the Katha and the powers of DC to cancel it as the subsequent cases are based on the katha made by regularising the construction on the gifted self acquired property
First answer received in 30 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
B should file suit for declaration, permanent and mandatory injunction and possession and damages against A and others.
Katha is a revenue record so DC has power but DC order can be challenged by way of appeal etc. Eviction suit can only be filed when there is relationship of landlord and tenant. Eviction suit is not maintainable against illegal possessor and trespasser who have illegally entered into property and whose possession is illegal. File said suit as suggested.
ultimately the civil court has the jurisdiction to decide the title of a property; revenue authorities have no say on such issues.
The Karnataka high court held that when an application is filed for change of khata or mutation entry or RTC, the tahsildar must verify whether there is any dispute with the title and direct the parties to approach the civil court in case one exists.
Only civil judge can cancel the same in a suit
On the basis of the registered sale deed B can fight his case, in fact he do not even has to file a suit for declaration if he has evidence to prove the possession of his purchased proeprty ever since the date of purchase.
If he has not been living in the property from the beginning and the opposite party taking advantage of his absence has grabbed his property then he can file a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction to remove the obstacles the other party has created over his proeprty and permanent injunction against the opposite party to restrain him from interfering in his possession and enjoyment of the property.
The DC is competent to inquire into the alleged change of khata records and can even punish the erring official, however the DC is not the authority to decide about yor title or to evict the unauthorised or illegal occupier out of the property.
Dear Client,
B can fight his case on the basis of the registered sale deed. He does not need to file a suit for declaration if he has evidence to prove that he has been in possession of the property since the date of purchase.
However, if he has not been living in the property and the other party has taken advantage of his absence to grab the property, then B can file a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction, and permanent injunction. The mandatory injunction would require the other party to remove any obstacles they have created on the property, and the permanent injunction would prevent the other party from interfering with B's possession and enjoyment of the property.
The DC is competent to inquire into the alleged change of khata records and can even punish the erring official. However, the DC is not the authority to decide about B's title or to evict the unauthorised or illegal occupier from the property.
Here is a more concise version:
B can use the registered sale deed to fight his case. If he has not been living in the property, he can file a suit for declaration, mandatory injunction, and permanent injunction. The DC can investigate the khata records, but they cannot decide about B's title or evict the occupier.
In revenue matters, the Deputy Commissioner (DC) has vide powers under various statues and revenue laws and so the DC can very well probe and cancel the Katha or any registration. However, the orders of the DC may be challenged before the Commissioner of the courts, if one feels that there is violation of the nay law or otherwise injustice has been done.
Can "A" claim adverse possession in court stating he has constructed the house on "B"s property and "B" has consent for that construction and as he was renting out the property for nearly 12-15 years till "B" came to live in his property 2 years back,B has given consent orally as "A" is his own brother to rent out. Now "A" is claiming that the entire 2 houses are in his possession and Municipal officials have colluded with "B" and regularized the construction . "A" himself was not living in the house but was renting out to others,"B" had oral consent for the same and the property tax from the date of purchase was paid by "B" but till date, but he paid property tax only for Plot.after regularization, his son paid a penalty for the house from 1990 till date . After transferring the property via Gift deed,"B" son has not given any consent to rent out. Now "A" is misusing the rental agreements and telling he can claim adverse possession and filed suit for katha cancelation after the FIR is filed against him and his friend for trespassing. He has not filed any case challenging the giftdeed or declare him as owner under adverse possession etc.
You cannot claim adverse possession against family member .possession of one is regarded as possession of all
2) to claim adverse possession brother has to prove that possession was open , hostile interrupted for period of 12 years
3’ contact a local lawyer and file civil suit to set aside gift added and seek declaration that you are absolute owner of property
If the other party is claiming adverse possession then it would be a clear wrong in his part proving that he had occupied the property illegally.
First of all see what case is going on and take defence on the basis of the documentary evidences in your possession as well as the merits on your side.
The opposite side may tell plenty of irrelevant things just to divert you or to pressurise you so that you will leave the proeprty to them, hence you discuss with your advocate on all such strategies and proceed as per law instead of going by the rumours
Tenant shall always remain tenant and he cannot become owner. Adverse possession cannot be basis to claim title like ownership over the property. Payment of property tax or penalty etc does not confer any ownership title nor the same are proof of ownership. Neither police nor criminal court has any jurisdiction to decide title of parties. If required consult with detail.
He can’t claim adverse possession