Adverse Possession

June 6, 2023

Adverse possession is a legal concept that refers to the hostile possession of property. It has been a subject of discussion and debate among legal experts, with differing opinions on its justification and impact.

The Concept of Adverse Possession

Adverse possession originates from the notion that it is important for land to be actively utilized rather than being left unoccupied. It involves the hostile possession of property that is continuous, uninterrupted, and peaceful. The rationale behind adverse possession stems from the idea that the title to land should not be in doubt for an extended period. Additionally, it allows for the utilization of idle land and offers protection to individuals who come to regard the occupant as the owner.

The Law Commission’s Report

The recent report by the 22nd Law Commission stated that there is no justification for introducing changes to the law relating to adverse possession. The commission emphasized that the period of limitation should not be increased, asserting that the existing provisions offer sufficient protection to the true owner. However, two members of this commission expressed their disagreement by submitting a dissenting note, arguing that the law encourages deceptive assertions masked as adverse possession.

Provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963

The Limitation Act, 1963, brought significant changes to the law on adverse possession. It shifted the burden of proof to the person claiming adverse possession and established specific time limits for the possession of private and government land. Article 65 of the Act specifies that adverse possession must be continuous and uninterrupted for twelve years to acquire title.

Ingredients of Adverse Possession

According to a 2004 Apex Court ruling, several elements contribute to adverse possession. These include the date of possession, nature of possession, knowledge of the other party, duration of possession, and the requirement for possession to be open and undisturbed. These factors play a crucial role in determining the validity of an adverse possession claim.

Supreme Court’s Perspective

The Supreme Court suggested changes to the law on adverse possession due to its perceived irrationality, illogicality, and harshness towards the true owner. The court noted that the existing law places a premium on dishonesty and advocated for a fresh look at the subject. The court recommended that the government seriously consider making suitable amendments to the law.

« Previous PostNext Post »