In this letters patent appeal, the High Court of Patna disagreed with the Single Judge who dismissed a writ petition based on the presumption that adverse possession claims against the State cannot extend beyond the date of land vesting.
Writ appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; matter remanded to Single Judge to consider claims on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1056 of 2005 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6971 of 2005
19 01-07-2013 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent-State of Bihar and its authorities, learned
Patna High Court LPA No.1056 of 2005 (19) dt.01-07-2013
2
counsel for respondent no.6 and learned counsel for private respondent no.9.
“No doubt, if bona fide dispute as to the title to the property had been raised and in order to trace the title to the property one was required to travel beyond the date on which by way of a legislative mandate the lands of the then Jamindars vested in State, it would have been not only convenient but also a necessity to have an opinion from a regular Court on the basis of appropriate evidence instead of obtaining the same or seeking to obtain the same through summary procedure provided in the said Act. But when there is no assertion as regards title but the same is claimed only on the basis of possession and when the solitary evidence in
Patna High Court LPA No.1056 of 2005 (19) dt.01-07-2013
3
support of possession suggests possession subsequent to the date of vesting, having regard to the fact that once a land has vested in the State, there cannot be any title through adverse possession, the same does not raise any bon fide question required to be determined by a full fledge trial.
In those circumstances, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.”
Patna High Court LPA No.1056 of 2005 (19) dt.01-07-2013
4
possession after fulfilling all the requirements provided for such possession for the period prescribed, the question of title through adverse possession would definitely arise and if any bona fide question is raised, it can also be determined by a full fledge trial.
(S.N. Hussain, J)
MPS/-
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a claim of adverse possession against the State can be legally limited to the date of vesting of Zamindari lands.
Whether a bona fide dispute regarding title arising from adverse possession after vesting requires a full fledged trial.
Whether the order dismissing the writ petition on the presumption that no title can exist through adverse possession after state vesting is correct.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Md. Naseem Alam
The State of Bihar
District Collector, West Champaran
Rahul Singh
Md. Sabir Ali
S.N. Hussain
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
