Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Regular Second Appeal filed by the appellants (original plaintiffs) against the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kadur, dated 10.06.2011 in R.A.No.98/2009, which allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree dated 09.11.2009 in O.S.No.315/2007 passed by the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kadur. The appellants had filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of suit property. The trial court decreed the suit, but the first appellate court reversed the decision, holding that the respondents had perfected title by adverse possession. The appellants then filed this second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court framed substantial questions of law regarding the perversity of the appellate court's findings. After hearing arguments, the court found that the appellants failed to prove their title and that the respondents had established adverse possession. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the appellate court's decision.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court reiterated that a second appeal lies only on substantial questions of law and not on findings of fact. The appellants failed to demonstrate any perversity in the concurrent findings of the courts below. (Paras 1-10) B) Property Law - Adverse Possession - Burden of Proof - The respondents claimed title by adverse possession. The court held that the burden is on the person claiming adverse possession to prove open, continuous, and hostile possession for the statutory period. The respondents successfully discharged this burden. (Paras 5-8) C) Property Law - Title - Suit for Declaration and Injunction - The appellants sought declaration of title and injunction. The court found that the appellants failed to prove their title over the suit property, and the respondents' possession was established. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment and decree of the first appellate court suffers from perversity and raises substantial questions of law under Section 100 CPC.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the judgment and decree of the first appellate court.
Law Points
- Adverse possession
- burden of proof
- substantial question of law
- second appeal
- limitation
