1. Jurisdictional objections cannot be agitated if pressed too late; the stage for raising such an issue is the initial proceeding, not the fourth instance of litigation.
2. The object of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 is to provide speedy machinery for eviction. The Act empowers the Estate Officer to determine unauthorized occupation, which includes a specific finding on whether the petitioners are trespassers or have title.
3. Summary proceedings under the Act are not precluded from deciding disputed questions of title where adequate opportunity of hearing and evidence are provided to the parties. Mere delay in raising claims or reliance on unregistered documents does not confer title.
4. Adverse possession requires animus possidendi. Mere long possession without the intention to possess adversely to the true owner or lack of rebuttal of the official record of rights does not amount to adverse possession.
5. Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to keeping subordinate courts within jurisdiction, correcting patent perversity, or gross failure of natural justice. The High Court cannot correct mere errors of law or fact or substitute its own view where the subordinate authority has considered the evidence.
6. If the core finding that mandatorily invokes the Act's jurisdiction (unauthorised occupation) is accepted, further land encroached during the same proceedings requires no fresh notice as it is a part and parcel of the original proceeding.
