Legal action against person claiming the land to be his after 24 years

785 votes

Adverse possession, sometimes colloquially described as "squatter's rights",[a] is a legal principle that applies when a person who does not have legal title to a piece of property—usually land (real property)—attempts to claim legal ownership based upon a history of possession or occupation of the land without the permission of its legal owner.[1] In general, a property owner has the right to recover possession of their property from unauthorized possessors through legal action such as ejectment. However, in the English common law tradition, courts have long ruled that when someone occupies a piece of property without permission and the property's owner does not exercise their right to recover their property for a significant period of time, not only is the original owner prevented from exercising their right to exclude, but an entirely new title to the property springs up in the adverse possessor. In effect, the adverse possessor becomes the property's new owner.[2][b] Over time, legislatures have created statutes of limitations that specify the length of time that owners have to recover possession of their property from adverse possessors. In the United States, for example, these time limits vary widely between individual states, ranging from as low as five years to as many as 40 years.[3] Although the elements of an adverse possession action are different in every jurisdiction, a person claiming adverse possession is usually required to prove non-permissive use of the property that is actual, open and notorious, exclusive, adverse, and continuous for the statutory period.[4][c] Personal property, traditionally known as "chattel", may also be adversely possessed, but owing to the differences in the nature of real and chattel property, the rules governing such claims are rather more stringent, and favor the legal owner rather than the adverse possessor. Claims for adverse possession of chattel often involve works of art.

Advocate Mohan Kumar H G LawRato

553 votes

Dear Sir, Law permits to file such suits but it has to be dismissed at the admission stage itself on the point of limitation. After 12 years even owner will lost his title to the land. Hire a competent lawyer.

Advocate Kishan Dutt Kalaskar LawRato

507 votes

There is delay in approaching the court by the person. As you told, the they owned the land in 1935. But in records of rights the previous owners name is shows. Therefore no need to worry. Apart from that you got transferred the said land in the year 1994. From that date to till today you are in peaceful enjoyment of said land uninterruptedly. As per law, there is limitation for filing the declaration suit under law. In your case he had approached the court after a long delay that is 24 years. Don't worry contest the case and filed the objection/written statement mainly on the delay issue.

Advocate M Lakshmikanth Arya LawRato

747 votes

The older owners if they owned in the year 1935 claim to evacuate you from the land, may have filed for partition. The previous owner from which you purchased the lands if longer exist their legal heirs should be added as parties. This kind of cases are on the rise due to high land prices. You can ask for a consultation with whatever papers they have sent to you.

Advocate S.K Prabhakar Shetty LawRato

796 votes

As per the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963, the time limit prescribed to institute a suit for possession for enforcing a right relating to an immovable property is 12 years. Thus the legal heirs of the original owner are barred by law as per the provisions of the Limitation Act and cannot file a suit today, i.e. 46 years after the property was transferred by the original owner to the subsequent owner. Thus the claim of the persons claiming to be legal heirs of B is barred. In the event that the legal heirs of the original owner (B) are trying to deprive you of your possession of the said property, you may file a suit before a court of competent jurisdiction for declaration of title under section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. However a suit under the said section can only be filed against a person who is denying, or who is interested in denying, a person’s title to any legal character or right in any property. In the present situation, unless the legal heirs of the original owner are attempting to interfere with your possession of the immovable property, it would not be advisable to file a suit under the said section 34 of the Specific Relief Act.

Advocate Rajesh Kumar K LawRato