Mutation of document registered in 1947

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 02 June 2018 This query is : Resolved
Recently I found a registered document in my home which was registreer in favour of my late father in the year 1947. Till now no other registered transactions took place. But now this land was in others possession without any valid legal documents. Can I mutate the document in my favour in the revenue records and get the possession?

Follow Query

Report Abuse

Ms.Usha Kapoor (Expert) 02 June 2018
Yes you can do so. Even if they plead adverse possession courts including SC is ruling against adverse possession on the ground that a trespasser cannot have a greater rights over true owner.

Guest (Expert) 02 June 2018
Anonymous query, seems to be merely an academic query.

R.Ramachandran (Expert) 02 June 2018
@Ms. Usha Kapoor: Can you cite a single Supreme Court decision, which has overturned such adverse possession?

If not, please stop kite flying!

@Anonymous: You may try for mutation. It is not going to be easy. In any case, even if the authorities agree to make mutation entries, it will entail compounding charges etc.
Even after mutation, there is no guarantee that you will be able to get possession, that too after 71 years!!

K Rajasekharan (Expert) 02 June 2018
In State Of Haryana vs Mukesh Kumar & Ors on 30 September, 2011 the Supreme Court says “Adverse possession allows a trespasser - a person guilty of a tort, or even a crime, in the eyes of law - to gain legal title to land which he has illegally possessed for 12 years. How 12 years of illegality can suddenly be converted to legal title is, logically and morally speaking, baffling”.

The court says “In our considered view, there is an urgent need for a fresh look of the entire law on adverse possession. We recommend the Union of India to immediately consider and seriously deliberate either abolition of the law of adverse possession and in the alternate to make suitable amendments in the law of adverse possession. A copy of this judgment be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India for taking appropriate steps in accordance with law”.

Vijay Raj Mahajan (Expert) 02 June 2018
You are the lawful owner of the property as the property was registered vide sale deed in your father's name and no further sale deed got registered after the original one as mentioned. You got the death certificate of your father , heirship certificate and with help of the these get the mutation of the property done in your name in the Municipality Records in case of objections with regard to delay in the process the extra charges may be levied which are applicable in the district/state where the property is located.

Ms.Usha Kapoor (Expert) 03 June 2018
11. n case the Parliament decided to retain the law of adverse possession, the Parliament could have simply required adverse possession claimants to possess the property in question for a period of 30 to 50 years, rather than a mere 12. Such an extension could have helped to ensure that successful claimants had lived on the land for generations, and were therefore less likely to be individually culpable for the trespass (although their forebears might have). A longer statutory period could also have decreased the frequency of adverse possession suits and ensured that only those claimants most intimately connected with the land acquired it, while only the most passive and unprotective owners lost title.
12. It was the Court’s bounden duty and obligation to ascertain the intention of the Parliament while interpreting the law. Law and Justice, more often than not, happily coincided only rarely we found serious conflict. The archaic law of adverse possession was one such. A serious re-look was absolutely imperative in the larger interest of the people. Adverse possession allowed a trespasser, a person guilty of a tort, or even a crime, in the eyes of law to gain legal title to land which he had illegally possessed for 12 years. How 12 years of illegality could suddenly be converted to legal title was, logically and morally speaking, baffling.
13. The outmoded law essentially asked the Judiciary to place its stamp of approval upon conduct that the ordinary Indian citizen would find reprehensible. The doctrine of adverse possession had troubled a great many legal minds. The Court was clearly of the opinion that time had come for change. If the protectors of law became the grabbers of the property (land and building), then, people would be left with no protection and there would be a total anarchy in the entire country. It was indeed a very disturbing and dangerous trend. It had to be arrested without further loss of time in the larger public interest. No government department, public undertaking, and much less the Police Department could be permitted to perfect the title of the land or building by invoking the provisions of adverse possession and grab the property of its own citizens in the manner that had been done in the case.
14. There was an urgent need for a fresh look of the entire law on adverse possession. The Supreme Court recommended the Union of India to immediately consider and seriously deliberate either abolition of the law of adverse possession and in the alternate to make suitable amendments in the law of adverse possession. A copy of the judgment was to be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India for taking appropriate steps in accordance with law.
Petition dismissed .Petitioner to bear costs.
http://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/court-of-india-declares-the-doctrine-of-adverse-possession-archaic/

http://kenyalaw.org/kenyalawblog/court-of-india-declares-the-doctrine-of-adverse-possession-archaic/

Ms.Usha Kapoor (Expert) 03 June 2018
Mr.Ramachandran,
Apart from the above Supreme court decision there are some other SC decisions also. Some 7 or 8 years ago I read some Adverse possession decisions in AIR wherein thee SC stated it is baffling that a trespasser's rights are more than a true owners Rights. They dismissed several petitions based on adverse possession.Unless parliaments abolishes the archaic Adverse possession law or makes amendments to existing law. we have got to deal with archaic adverse possession law.

R.Ramachandran (Expert) 03 June 2018
I think you are a thoroughly confused person!

What did the Supreme Court hold in case cited by you?

It declined to declare the petitioner as ownership of property on the basis of his claim of adverse possession. THAT'S ALL.

Declining to grant title to a person based upon his adverse possession is completely different from restoring the possession to the true owner from the person having adverse possession of the property!

Did the Supreme Court restore the possession of the property to the rightful/true owner? The answer is NO.

Therefore, your original answer to the query that "Even if they plead adverse possession, courts including Supreme Court is RULING against adverse possession ...." is wrong. If the Supreme Court has ruled so, then it would have become law. On the contrary, the Supreme Court is expecting the Government to take appropriate steps either by abolishing law of adverse possession, or to make suitable amendments in the law of adverse possession.

Kumar Doab (Expert) 03 June 2018
Pls post with your ID and not as AQ and you can get many replies.
Your ID does not mean your email id or phone number and don’t post these also.

Kumar Doab (Expert) 03 June 2018
The authority under whose jurisdiction property falls has a set procedure for such matters if NO WILL has surfaced; Intestate Succession…….and the prescribed forms, procedure, process is available in O/o Authority and even on website. Death certificates, legal heir certificate/affidavit (per local procedure-precedence) are basic requirements. Then authority can act upon and transfer the ownership in the name of legal heirs after submission of requisite forms/docs fees if any. Obtain copy of updated mutations records showing share of legal heirs.
If the authority has suggested some other steps then you have not posted on those.

Take help of your own LOCAL senior counsel of unshakable repute and integrity specializing in revenue/civil matters and well versed with latest citations, LOCAL applicable rules/laws and having successful track record…. and worth his/her salt… and discuss in person.
There are many similar queries that you can search in SEARCH option in threads, Articles etc e.g;
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Property-law-601596.asp

Guest (Expert) 03 June 2018
Anonymous hypothetical academic query. There is no use of wasting energy on discussion. If interested in claiming the possession, he should have approached an experienced lawyer for detailed discussion on the basis of the case related document, rather than seeking a solution on a casual query.
.

Guest (Expert) 03 June 2018
Anonymous hypothetical academic query. There is no use of wasting energy on discussion. If interested in claiming the possession, he should have approached an experienced lawyer for detailed discussion on the basis of the case related document, rather than seeking a solution on a casual query.

K Rajasekharan (Expert) 04 June 2018
The answer given by Mr Mahajan is good enough for you to proceed with.

You can seek further clarification as and when you find some unpredictable troubles on the way ahead.

There may not be any definite answer for such things which do not normally have any parallel in the past to cite as a binding precedent.

K Rajasekharan (Expert) 04 June 2018
Who can ask queries in what manner - as anonymous or with a fake name or with his real name - and who are allowed to answer whichever queries, are things to be decided by the managers of this site.

A category of stakeholders of the site allowed to function as 'experts' seems to have no much say on such matters which are already fixed by the website admin.

It seems what is expected from experts is nothing but answer to queries and not to regulate users' behaviour of whatsoever nature.

No doubt, it is an unwarranted transgression into an area where an expert has no much right to tread into.

Guest (Expert) 04 June 2018
No objection, if Mr. Rajasekharan feels pleasure in imparting tutorials to the anonymous query makers or law students in their anonymity, but his sermons to other experts are uncalled for, posing like a director on the experts. Talking on transgression on his part has no logic, when he, himself has made transgression in to the area of the experts. It is the sole discretion of the experts to reply or not to anonymous query. The query maker is duly made known that the particular expert does not like to render any advice on his query due to his anonymity.

Mutation of document registered in 1947

Similar Resolved Queries :