VIDHYADEVI Vs. STATE OF M.P & ANTR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the concurring judgment and decree dated 04/08/2011 passed in civil appeal No.14/2010 by I Additional District Judge, Bhind District Bhind affirming the judgment and decree dated 20/09/2010 passed in civil suit No.44A/2010 by II Civil Judge, ClassI, Lahar under section 100 of CPC, whereby the plaintiff/appellant's suit for declaration and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

(2.) IT is apposite to state law as regards to acquisition of title by adverse possession as consistently held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and followed by the various High Courts including the jurisdictional High Court.

(3.) THE facts required to plead and prove adverse possession when the party to a lis set up a plea of acquisition of title adverse possession has to be specific as regards to period and date from which he claims possession and then have to prove that the possession was adequate in continuity, in publicity and in extent to show that his possession was actually visible, exclusive, hostile and continues over the statutory period as contemplated under Section 65 of the Limitation Act to the knowledge of the real owner. Mere physical act of exclusive possession by, itself, cannot justify the claim of adverse possession.