| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1954 SLG 34 1954 SLD 34 1954 PLD 594 |
Lahore High Court
Regular Second Appeal No. 162 of 1953, decided on 15th June, 1954 from the decree of the Court of Sheikh Masud Ahmad, District Judge, Mianwali, dated the 4th May, 1953
ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, J
Ghulam Abbas Jafri, for Appellant. Mian Muhammad Shafi, for
Respondent
Regular Second Appeal No. 162 of 1953, decided on 15th June, 1954 from the decree of the Court of Sheikh Masud Ahmad, District Judge, Mianwali, dated the 4th May, 1953
ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, J
Ghulam Abbas Jafri, for Appellant. Mian Muhammad Shafi, for
Respondent
AHMAD
VS
GHULAM MUHAMMAD and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Adverse possession-Abandonment or relinquishment of property by adverse possessor-Limitation, ceases to run against true owner. On abandonment or, relinquishment of property by the adverse possessor, the possession automatically revests in the owner and no act is necessary on his part to bring about such revesting. Hence, on such abandonment or relinquishment, limitation ceases to run against the true owner. The Trustees, Executors and Agency Co., v. Short, (1888) 13 A C 793, Secretary of State v. Krishnamoni Gupta, 129 I. A. 104 (116) and Bhabani Prosanna Lahiri and another v. Manindra Chandra Roy Choudhury and others, A 1 R 1935 Cal. 760 ref. to. (b) Adverse possession-Trespasser dispossessed by other trespasser within 12 years-Title of rightful owner is not affected. If an intruder without title holds possession for less than 12 years, and is then dispossessed by another trespasser, who does not hold for the statutory period, the title of the rightful owner is unaffected by the statute. Abdul Latif and others v. Hamed Ghazi and others, A I R 1933 Cal. 898 and Sukhdeo v. Mst. Ram Dulari, A I R 1926 Oudh 313 relied on. JUDGMENT ABDUL AZIZ KHAN, J.-This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by Ghulam Muhammad son of Ali (plaintiff respondent) on. 4th October 1951 against Ahmad defendant appellant) and Ghulam Muhammad son of Usman (defendant respondent) to recover possession of 18 kanals 10 marlas of land situated in village Kureshi, district Mianwali. The suit land is comprised of Khasra Nos. 3774/1487/1518/1519 Ghulam Muhammad (plaintiff-respondent) contended that the land was owned by him and that half of it was mortgaged with Mehar Hussain etc., and the other half was submerged under water on account of river action. He further contended that two- months prior to the institution of the suit mortgaged land had been redeemed by him, and that the other half was no longer under water and that the defendants had taken wrongful possession of it. Written statements were filed by both the defendants but later Ghulam Muhammad son of Usman (defendant-respondent No. 1) admitted the plaintiff's cases. The suit was, therefore, contested by Ahmad…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492