Mobile View
Advanced Search Search Tips
Order results by
Relevance
Document Types
All
1 - 10 of 37019 (2.31 seconds)

that ho did not discharge that burden by merely proving title coupled with enjoyment at some earlier period. The correct ... entitled to retain possession once the plaintiff has proved title at some period more than 12 years ago, it seems
Patna High Court
- Cites 23 - Cited by 14 -
62 Ind Cas 1
- D Miller
years of the suit or on the defendants to prove title by adverse possession. Relying upon the decision of this ... presump-tion of possession arising from admitted or proved title is not at all available. That decision has been distinguished
Patna High Court
- Cites 25 - Cited by 11 -
AIR 1958 Pat 386
- K Singh
Specific Relief Act is utilised the plaintiff need not prove title, and the title of the defendant does not avail ... file. a suit for ejectment pleading and proving his title to the suit land. A mere possessory suit after
Supreme Court of India
- Cites 17 - Cited by 159 -
1968 AIR 1165
recover possession from the appellant TTD unless the TTD proved title. The learned Judge held that the oral evidence adduced ... liable to be dismissed as the TTD had proved titled and the said title was subsisting and was never extinguished
Supreme Court of India
- Cites 13 - Cited by 45 - M J Rao.
judgment be maintained that a person who proves title in a suit for ejectment has the right to the decree ... upon the adverse possessor. Accordingly when the holder of title proves, as in their Lordships' view he does with some
Madras High Court
- Cites 16 - Cited by 7 -
(1940) 2 MLJ 190
- Mockett
instance held that the plaintiff had failed to prove both title and possession and dismissed the suit. The learned District ... Judge on appeal found that plaintiff's title was proved, but that he failed to prove possession within 12 years
Calcutta High Court
- Cites 32 - Cited by 6 -
67 Ind Cas 673
been established but that they have failed to prove their title with regard to plot No. 43. On the question ... that he did not discharge his burden by merely proving title coupled with enjoyment at some earlier period
Patna High Court
- Cites 13 - Cited by 1 -
AIR 1952 Pat 303
- Narayan
entitled for declaration in absence of production of original title deeds when the plaintiffs have discharged the burden ... justified in holding that the Sangam did not prove its title over the suit property ignoring the revenue records
Madras High Court
- Cites 15 - Cited by 0
burden is on the appellants/plaintiffs to prove title and in the light of the non-discharge of such burden ... part of the appellants/plaintiffs to establish the title by proving Ex.A-5 at least by examining the mother
Andhra High Court
- Cites 16 - Cited by 0
club and its office bearers have failed to prove their title in the suit property by way of adverse possession ... appellants' suit as his clients asserted and proved their title and possession in respect of the suit property
Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
- Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - J Bhattacharya
Get new documents for this query in your RSS feed reader -
1  
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next