NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has upheld a Jharkhand High Court decision that had set aside a first appellate court’s decision granting ownership rights on the basis of adverse possession in a civil suit.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan concurred with the Jharkhand High Court’s view that the first appellate court had acted beyond the pleadings in introducing and deciding an adverse possession claim not originally pleaded in the suit.
The Justice Pardiwala-led Bench said, “It is a settled position of law that the foundation for the plea of adverse possession must be laid in the pleadings and then an issue must be framed and tried. A plea not properly raised in the pleadings or issues at the stage of trial would not be permitted to be raised for the first time at the stage of first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).”
The civil dispute arose from a title suit filed in 1999, seeking cancellation of a 1997 sale deed executed in favour of the defendants, terming it “bogus” and “inoperative”, along with a prayer for possession and permanent injunction.
The trial court dismissed the suit in August 2018, finding no fraud or misrepresentation in the execution of the sale deed. On appeal, the Deoghar District Judge decreed the suit in the plaintiffs’ favour in respect of a certain property, holding that they had perfected title through adverse possession as the defendants had not reclaimed possession since 2000.
The defendants challenged this before the Jharkhand High Court, which held that there was no foundational pleading of adverse possession and that such a claim cannot mature during the pendency of a suit.
“There is no concept of perfection of title by adverse possession during the pendency of the suit between the parties. [A]dverse possession cannot be decreed on a title which is not pleaded, ” observed the Jharkhand HC.
Expressing its agreement, the Supreme Court said that a plea of adverse possession is fact-specific and must be expressly raised in the plaint.