Article 31, like Art, 19 (1) (f), is concerned with “property.” Both the Articles are in the same chapter and deal with fundamental rights. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the […]
THE KERALA CHRISTIAN CHURCH PROPERTIES AND INSTITUTIONS TRUST BILL A bill to promote the more democratic, efficient and just administration of the temporal affairs and properties of the Churches (Sabha) to constitute […]
If property belongs to Government for acquisition of easementary right by prescription user of “30 years” is required.
It is settled principle of law that what has not been conferred in the plaint cannot be proved. Only right of easement by way of prescription has been pleaded, alleging that Plaintiff was using the land of Plot No. 164 for 20 years. It is pertinent to mention here that at the end of Section 15 of Indian Easement Act, 1882, which pertains to acquisition by prescription, it is specifically mentioned that if the property, over which a right is claimed, belongs to the Government, the word ’20 years’ shall be read as ’30 years’. As such, in respect of a Government land mere user for 20 years does not confer any easementary right by way of prescription to the Plaintiff, as he has nowhere pleaded that he used the land for 30 years or more.
A joint Hindu family under Dayabhaga is, like a Mitakshara family, normally joint in food, worship and estate-SC
The differences between the Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools on the birth-right of coparceners and the rules of inheritance have no bearing on the issues arising in this appeal, particularly on the question […]
U/S 372 of the Indian Succession Act The expression ‘succession certificate’ has not been defined in the Act. The preamble to Succession Certificate (Act VII of 1889) gives an idea about the […]
In the case of Smt. Radhika Devi and Another Vs. Ajay Kumar Sharma and Others [ (2011) 1 PLJR 845 : (2010) 66 RCR(Civil) 445 PATNA HIGH COURT]and submitted that no probate can be granted […]
No property shall be compulsorily acquired or taken possession of save for a public purpose, and save by the authority of law which provides for compensation therefor and either fixes the amount of compensation or specifies the principles on and the manner
in which compensation is to be determined and given.
The Court tried to read the Human RIGHTS position in the context of adverse possession , which is commendable.
In Karnataka State Financial Corporation Versus N. Narasimahaiah and OTHERS [AIR 2008 SC 1797 : (2008) 4 SCR 853 : (2008) 5 SCC 176 : JT 2008 (4) SC 183 : (2008) 4 SCALE 473] […]
Under West Bengal Land Reform Act 1956 In order to establish the claim of pre-emption the petitioner pre-emptor has to establish the basic ingredients of Section 8 of the Act of 1955. […]
Concept of adverse possession and its consequences wherever attracted has been recognized in the statute dealing with limitation.
In India Article 65 of Limitation Act prescribed limitation to recover possession from the person in wrongful possession is 12 years from the date when the person in possession set up hostile […]