MOHANLAL Vs. MIRZA ABDUL GAFFAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and decree of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Second Appeal No. 460 of 1975 made on (sic) 30,1986.

(2.) IT is not necessary to elaborate all the facts in detail. Suffice it to state that the appellant had come into possession of the suit -lands pursuant to an agreement of sale dated 8.3.1956. He paid part consideration of Rs. 500 and obtained possession of the lands. Subsequently, the respondent purchased the lands by sale deed dated 23.3.1960. In the meanwhile, the appellant's suit for specific performance of the contract for sale was dismissed and became final. The respondent filed the suit for possession which has given rise to this appeal. The trial Court decreed the suit. On appeal, it was reversed and dismissed. In second appeal, the High Court set aside the judgment and decree of the appellate Court and restored the decree of the trial Court. Thus this appeal by special leave.

(3.) AS regards the first plea, it is inconsistent with the second plea. Having come into possession under the agreement, he must disclaim his right thereunder and plead and prove assertion of his independent hostile adverse possession to the knowledge of the transferor or his successor in title or interest and that the latter had acquiesced to his illegal possession during the entire period of 12 years, i.e., up to completing the period of his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. Since the appellant's claim is founded on section 53 -A, it goes without saying that he admits by implication that he came into possession of the land lawfully under the agreement and continued to remain in possession till date of the suit. Thereby the plea of adverse possession is not available to the appellant.