ACHUTHAN UNNI Vs. VALLY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The pieces of land bearing Survey Numbers 391/7, 391 8 and 391/9 of Parur Village belong to and are in the possession of the plaintiff. At the south of them is S. No. 391/6 belonging to the defendants and in their joint possession; and at the west is S.391/10 which the defendants hold as tenants of Desiyogam Madhom. Plaintiff complains that the fence at the boundary between his land and that in the defendants possession has been shifted a little into the plaintiffs property and thereby an encroachment has been committed by the defendants which over the entire length of the boundary at the west and the south, amounted to about 1 1/2 cents in the aggregate. This suit is to remove the encroachment with consequential reliefs. The defendants denied the trespass and claimed, if the suit property be found to be encroachment, the plaintiff has lost tittle thereto by their adverse possession. The Munsiff held:

(2.) Ext. A is the report and Ext. A1 the plan prepared by a Commissioner deputed to make a local inspection and report regarding the alleged encroachment. They show that a very narrow bit of land, which at its broadest point is 6 links in width and on an average is only about 2 links wide, has been encroached by the defendants and annexed to their possession. Pw. 2 has sworn that the encroachment has been gradual. Admittedly, in between the two properties there is no permanent boundary protection, but is only a temporary fence put up annually. It is freely conceded by the defendants that the plaintiff is the owner of S. No. 391/7, 8 and 9 in possession thereof except the narrow bit at the boundary forming the disputed property.

(3.) The survey and demarcation of lands by the State have a purpose; they are intended to identify the different pieces of land so as to regulate the rights of landholders. Bights in land will normally be presumed to be in terms of the survey divisions. When a person is admitted or found to be in possession of a survey division, the presumption is of such possession being extensive with the survey division concerned; and he is not to be constrained to prove his possession of every inch of it. It is then for the person who asserts the contrary to prove by positive evidence that a defined portion thereof is in his adverse possession and has been lost to the owner thereof. If the court finds the same, the Land Records will be corrected accordingly sub-dividing the original survey division so as to demarcate each holding with separate survey number.