Rama Nand And ORS v. Ram Kumar And ORS
!
"!
! "
# #$# %%% # $ % "
& $
$
"
'
%%% #$#&
'()
! ( ) ! &
) ! &
&
! * !
!
+ &
!
,
( ) ! ,& ) !
- . !) ! 'Ravinder Kaur Grewal and others Vs. Manjit Kaur and others, Civil Appeal No. 7764 of 2014, ! / * & !+ '60. When we consider the law of adverse possession as has developed vis−à−vis to property dedicated to public use, courts have been loath to confer the right by adverse possession. There are instances when such properties are encroached upon and then a plea JYOTI 2019.09.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
of adverse possession is raised. In Such cases, on the land reserved for public utility, it is desirable that rights should not accrue. The law of adverse possession may cause harsh consequences, hence, we are constrained to observe that it would be advisable that concerning such properties dedicated to public cause, it is made clear in the statute of limitation that no rights can accrue by adverse possession.
61. Resultantly, we hold that decisions of Gurudwara Sahab v. Gram Panchayat Village Sirthala (supra) and decision relying on it in State of Uttarakhand v. Mandir Shri Lakshmi Siddh Maharaj (supra) and Dharampal (dead) through LRs v. Punjab Wakf Board (supra) cannot be said to be laying down the law correctly, thus they are hereby overruled. We hold that plea of acquisition of title by adverse possession can be taken by plaintiff under Article 65 of the Limitation Act and there is no bar under the Limitation Act, 1963 to sue on aforesaid basis in case of infringement of any rights of a plaintiff.'
0! ( ) ! !
& &, 1) ! '!2 !
! !
,
&
&
! !
3 & !
& , - . !) ! , !
* #$#+ jyoti3 5 26 7 6 7 6 JYOTI 2019.09.27 09:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document