In Brief
The Supreme Court reversed a High Court order that had allowed a claim for adverse possession over disputed agricultural land in Madhya Pradesh. The original owner sold the land to a third party (Urmila Devi) in 1972, who then sold portions to the appellants. The claimant (Matadin, later his heirs) asserted possession from 1960-1961 based on Khasra land records. The Court found the Khasra entries showing the claimant's possession were fraudulently altered by collectorate clerks, and that the land had been sold away before 12 years passed. The Court held that adverse possession requires proof of peaceful, open, continuous and hostile possession for the full statutory period, with the onus on the claimant. The appeals were allowed and the suit dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.