Real Estate, Property and Litigation : High Court Highlights Some Important Legal Principles

Real Estate, Property and Litigation : High Court Highlights Some Important Legal Principles

In an important judgment some interesting legal issues concerning property arose. The discussion on litigations related to property have their own charm. The stakes are often high because immovable properties are some of the assets where huge amounts are involved. 

Before we discuss law, here are some facts : 

This Case was an original suit ; Suit was tried by HC ; Suit took less than 7 years for final disposal ; filing done in 2008 and judgment in 2014. 

Case of Plaintiff : A Will, A PoA and a School 

Plaintiff ["MJ] claimed to be the Owner of land. Land was located in Delhi.

MJ argued that B was original owner of plot ; plot was situated beside school. B died and by a will, B's property devolved on C. MJ says that C executed irrevocable power of attorney in favour of MJ.

When MJ constructed wall, school principal ["S"] that they will demolish the wall. Later on, some construction was done on MJ's property by "S". 

Opposing Stand : The Letter and Possession

Let us see the stand of Defendant [S] ; S says land was transferred to S by E. S also said ownership document of MJ are forged. S argued that land was donated to S by E. S said once E had donated land to S then B cannot have any authority to sell/transfer the land. 

S further claimed that land is in possession of S and a representative of S is living on that land. 

MJ argued that B was actual owner of land. F [biological father of C] gave his son in adoption to E. 

Observations : Who Wins 

There was no registered conveyance deed in favour of S executed by E. E was never owner of property. Original jamabandi was called in Court. Declaration of adoption was called in Court. Photocopy of original will was produced in Court. Original office copy of irrevocable PoA was produced in Court. 

S agreed that B was owner of plot. Original sale deed was executed in favour of B. C had acquired ownership through will. B [wife of "E"] was the owner of property. 

When a person alleges that document produced by another party is forged and fabricated, then onus is on such person person who had made allegations. S failed to establish it. 

S produced a letter given by E. S claimed that land stood donated to it by a letter of E. It was noted that B never sold property to E. Further, land being under consideration of acquisition also showed that land is not owned by "S".

Defendants were restrained from interfering in peaceful possession of MJ's property.

The lesson learnt here is : merely being in possession of land does not protect one's possession, if the ownership itself is in question. 

Case reference is Manish Jain v. Govt Boys Hr Sec School [2014] GCtR 6511 (Delhi).