property of hindu women
satish
(Querist) 06 December 2009
This query is : Resolved
My client mother acquired property from her father who has dead. My client mother is going to sale the property. My client is residing in that property since 25 years. Whether my client can claim the property by the way of adverse possession or any other way ?
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 06 December 2009
Your client's mother have every right to sell the property. The mother have allowed her child to reside in the property, he cannot claim title by the way of adverse possession even if he is residing there since 25 years.
satish
(Querist) 06 December 2009
pls suggest any other way to injuction the sale of the property
Arvind Singh Chauhan
(Expert) 06 December 2009
I think he can claim title on the ground of adverse possession, if the possession is more than 12 years old and uninterrupted.
Poonam Upadhyay pathak
(Expert) 06 December 2009
your client's mother have every right to sell the property and ur client cannot claim the title even though he is residing in the property for 25 years.
satish
(Querist) 06 December 2009
pls let me know the grounds?
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 06 December 2009
Satish, you asked the reasons for the same in your PM, let me clarify- the property was inherited by your client's mother from her father, now it is her absolute property, so she has every right to dispose it as per her wish. It is not the ancestral property of your client, so as to claim any share in it.
And the mother had given the property to her son for residence, she had allowed him to reside in it, so such possession, for however long period, is not considered ADVERSE. Possession for a period of 12 years or more is not the only sole deciding factor in the concept of ADVERSE POSSESSION.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 06 December 2009
Your client can make dispute and can try to seek stay on the ground that the property received to mother in her inheritance is an ancestral property which cannot be sold without any necessity as the plaintiff is also having his further share in the property and is continuously residing therein. at least stay or the ground of forceful eviction can be taken.
niranjan
(Expert) 06 December 2009
Makkadsir is correct.
Anish goyal
(Expert) 06 December 2009
Agree with all the experts except Arvind sir
