The plea of title and adverse possession are contradictory pleas and cannot be taken simultaneously: SC

Narasamma & Ors. v A. Krishnappa (Dead) Through LRs.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2710 of 2010 decided on August 26, 2020.

https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2009/12852/12852_2009_36_1501_23654_Judgement_26-Aug-2020.pdf

Bench: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ajay Rastogi, Anirudha Bose, JJ.

Issue:

Whether simultaneously a plea can be taken contradictory pleas of title and adverse possession in the same suit and from the same date?

Held:

The Supreme Court held that the claim of title and the plea of adverse possession cannot taken simultaneously. The court noted that the pleas on title and adverse possession are mutually inconsistent and the latter does not begin to operate until the former is renounced. The court also held that in order to establish adverse possession an inquiry is required to be made into the starting point of such adverse possession and thus, when the recorded owner got dispossessed would be crucial. It has to be specifically pleaded and proved that the party was in adverse possession for 12 years and its only after that period that the real owner will lose title.

Also, to constitute adverse possession, the three classic requirements, which need to co-exist are nec vi, i.e, adequate in continuity, nec clam, i.e, adequate in publicity and nec precario, i.e., adverse to a competitor, in denial of title and his knowledge. The possession has to be in public and to the knowledge of the true owner as adverse, and this is necessary as a plea of adverse possession seeks to defeat the right of the true owner