In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India set aside a judgment of the Allahabad High Court, emphasizing that ownership and possession of land cannot be claimed through permissive possession arising from tenancy. The case involved a disputed piece of land claimed by the appellant through a registered sale deed in 1966, while the respondents asserted ownership based on their continued possession at the time of the abolition of Zamindari.

The appellant filed a suit for injunction and relief for possession, challenging the respondents' claim of ownership through adverse possession. The Division Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal noted that even if the respondents were in possession prior to 1944, their possession could not be considered adverse as they were tenants, and their tenancy was permissible, not adverse.

The Trial Court, considering the sale deed, Mutation, and Khasra and Khewat entries, found the appellant to be the rightful owner of the disputed land. However, the District Judge, on appeal, held that there was no question of the abolition of Zamindari concerning the disputed land, refuting the respondents' claim.

The Allahabad High Court dismissed the appellant's suit on the grounds of limitation, stating that the respondents had matured their rights through adverse possession since the first suit for arrears of rent was filed.

The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the case, disagreed with the High Court's findings, highlighting the absence of considerations on limitation and adverse possession. The Court affirmed the appellant's ownership rights, emphasizing the validity of the sale deed from 1966. The Supreme Court rejected the High Court's reasoning and allowed the appeal, restoring the appellant's claim to the disputed land.

Case: Brij Narayan Shukla v. Sudesh Kumar Alias Suresh Kumar & Ors.

Civil Appeal No. 7502 of 2012.

Click here to read/download judgment.