Iswar v. Piter
Case brief
What is this about?
Hour appeal tried to challenge lower courts dismissing a suit for declaration of title over a water reservoir based on adverse possession. The High Court held the appeal lacked merit as there was no proof of hostile possession or date of entry.
What did the court decide?
Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
What the court decided
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK
SA No.248 of 1992
From the judgment and decree dated 27.07.1992 and 05.08.1992 respectively passed by Shri D.K. Sahu, learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in T.A. No. 20/4 of 1988/90 confirming the judgment and decree dated 15.01.1988 and 30.01.1988 respectively passed by Mr. A.B. Pattnaik, learned Sub-oridnate Judge, Kuchinda in T.S. No. 7/37 of 1980-83.
----------Iswar Chandra Patel …. Appellant
Versus Piter Tirkey and others …. Respondents For Appellant … Mr. Asutosh Mahanta, Adv. For Respondents … Mr. R.P. Mohapatra, A.G.A. (respondent nos.3 to 5) None (respondent nos.1 & 2)
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.RATH
Date of hearing & judgment: 12.09.2017
Dr. A.K.Rath, J Plaintiff no.2 is the appellant against a confirming judgment
in a suit for declaration of right, title, interest over the water reservoir and permanent injunction.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether mere user by villagers and government aid can disentitle plaintiffs to claim right over a water reservoir.
Whether the lower courts were justified in discarding the plaintiffs' case.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Iswar Chandra Patel
- respondent
Piter Tirkey
Coram
A.K.RATH
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court