In Brief
The Supreme Court allowed civil appeals against the High Court's judgment setting aside a First Appellate Court's order. The respondent claimed ownership of half a property and sought its recovery from the appellant, who claimed complete ownership and 28 years of continuous possession as owner. While the First Appellate Court granted the respondent a declaration of title over half the property, it denied recovery of possession. The High Court reversed this, granting possession. The Supreme Court held that a decree of possession does not automatically follow a declaration of title, and the plaintiff's claim must be judged on its own strength, not on the defendant's failure to plead adverse possession. With the defendant in possession for over 28 years, the plaintiff's claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act. The High Court also improperly allowed the second appeal without properly formulating and discussing a substantial question of law as required by the Code of Civil Procedure."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.