Suit under article 64
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 06 January 2021
This query is : Resolved
In suit under article 64, it is settled law that plaintiff only needs to prove possession and title need not be proved unless Defendant can proved one.
But if plaintiff fails to show his title but proved his previous possession and Defendant who is in possession fails to prove his title but proved that title belongs to third person through whom he has come in to possession then what will happen?
Whether plaintiff will get possession or Defendant will retain the possession?
Advice given by one of the lawyer is that possession is nine tenth of law and hence plaintiff suit will be dismissed but I do not agree because plaintiff is dispossessed illegally when plaintiff was in settle possession.
Any decision of court like Nair Service Society on the above will be helpful. Decision of Nair service society only rules that plaintiff can get back possession if Defendant cannot proved title but does not says that what will happen in above case if title of third party is proved by Defendant.
Thank you.
J K Agrawal
(Expert) 06 January 2021
This query involve high tech question of law and the same can be discussed with an advocate and not with anonymouse.
Guest
(Expert) 06 January 2021
Refer the Supreme Court's Judgement in the Cases of 1) Ramiah VS Narayan Reddy --Late --by Lrs dated 10th Aug 2004 and 2) Anjappa & Ors VS Somalingappa & Anr on 22nd Aug 2000. The Orders could be useful in your issue please
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 06 January 2021
Thank you for the reply. But I think that there is some mis understanding. Plaintiff is family member of third party. Plaintiff claims joint ownership but third party denies it because as per the document record third party is owner. So plaintiff will fail to prove his title but plaintiff was in settle possession and Disspossesd by Defendant after purchasing suit property from third party on unregistered sale deed. Plaintiff has very strong evidence of settled possession prior to Dispossession by Defendant. Third party is party to suit but is ex parte. Defendant has no title by virtue of unregistered sale deed but in possession.
Neither plaintiff nor Defendant claims adverse possession. Plaintiff claims possession based on previous possession and Defendant claim right to possession because sale by third party and claims that third party is owner.
Hence even if it proved that Defendant does not have title but third party is the owner then whether plaintiff will succeed in suit under article 64 based on his previous possession?
Guest
(Expert) 07 January 2021
Decision of the Courts will not be confirmed by any one. Decisions would be purely on the Discretion and Concern of the Courts which can not be questioned by any one. Apart from your Advocate who appears for you better show it to another Local Good Senior Advocates all the concerned Papers and Documents and Seek his Opinion.
Guest
(Expert) 08 January 2021
Article 64 -- Limitations Act
