I gather that a property which is technically owned by X but which has been under the custody of Y for 50 years cannot be claimed by Y via virtue of adverse possession if X and Y are blood relatives. What degree of relation does this imply? for example if they are brothers, then i guess adverse possession cant apply. What if X is the nephew of Y? any case law or references?
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
The law of adverse possession doesn't mean that if a property is with someone is in possession for a very long time the owner can't claim it.
The law is that adverse possession means that when you want your property back and demand that the tenant or any person in possession vacate it and he doesn't then it is called adverse possession.
Law of adverse possession applies to everyone whether they be blood relatives or not.
just to be clear, you are saying that whether the true owner and the current custodian (usurper or squatter) are blood relatives does not matter in Indian law?
Yeah. Even if the usurper and the owner are blood relatives or not the law applies equally.
If the property was owned by X then how come it was under the custody of Y?
Even though they both are relatives if it was not a jointly owned or coshared property the claim of title by Y perfecting the law of adverse possession cannot be denied owing to continuous possession and enjoyment for over a period of more than 12 years by which was very well in the knowledge and adverse to X.
Don't put different laws together, misinterpret them and derive at your own meaning or understanding.
Fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, grandparents, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, and first cousins are all considered blood relations.
2)
brother cannot claim adverse possession against family member
3) possession has to be open, hostile, exclusive, actual, and continual for the statutory period.
4) it is well settled law that between co-owners, the mere fact that one co-owner is in possession of the entire property would not be sufficient evidence of ouster so as to extinguish the rights of the other co-owner
5) Y cannot claim adverse possession
You cannot claim adverse possession against family member
2) possession of one is regarded as possession of all
3)
The Supreme Court in Chatti Konati Rao & Ors. vs Palle Venkata Subba Rao has explained the underlying principles in cases pertaining to claims of Adverse Possession
a) It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is "nec vi, nec clam, nec precario", that is, peaceful, open and continuous.
b) The possession must be adequate in continuity, in publicity and in extent to show that their possession is adverse to the true owner.
c) It must start with a wrongful disposition of the rightful owner and be actual, visible, exclusive, hostile and continued over the statutory period. (See S.M. Karim v. Bibi Sakina AIR 1964 SC 1254, Parsinni v. Sukhi (1993) 4 SCC 375 and D.N. Venkatarayappa v. State of Karnataka (1997) 7 SCC 567)
Please state the actual problem.
If this is a mere academic question then specify it .
Dear Client,
According to the doctrine of adverse possession, a person acquires legal ownership of land after holding it without interruption for more than 12 years, regardless of who else owns the property. A person who held property but subsequently abandoned it without taking any action is seen as having forfeited their claim to the land or property. In the case of Ravindra Kaur Grewal v. Manjeet Kaur (2019), it had been held by the Court that the person who has the possession of any immovable property for more than 12 years has the right to acquire its ownership. The Karnataka Board of Wakf v. Government of India (2004) case established a precedent wherein an individual who claims ownership of property held by another takes possession of it. Despite this, ownership is transferred to the possessor right away if the landlord with legitimate ownership doesn't pursue legal action for a period of 12 years or more. The guidelines established in this instance support the adverse possession theory even more
The adverse possession is only proved when the possession becomes hostile otherwise even for 50 years it can’t be claimed
- As per Supreme court Judgment, provisions on adverse possession are made under the Limitation Act, 1963. In case an owner does not stake his claim over his property for 12 years, a squatter can acquire legal rights over the property. The prescribed period in case of for government-owned properties is 30 years.
- Further, to claim his ownership, this squatter(X) has to prove that his occupancy of the property has been uninterrupted for the entire period.
- Further, he will also have to prove that he has been the sole occupant of the property.
- However, adverse possession not applied within family members , whether the land was encroached for a period of 12 years or any long period.
