Introduction:

In the case of aa dispute between Brij Narayan Shukla and Sudesh Kumar (and others), the Supreme Court deliberated on a crucial aspect of adverse possession in landlord-tenant relationships. Brij Narayan Shukla, the plaintiff, claimed ownership through a registered sale deed in 1966, initiating a legal battle for possession against Sudesh Kumar (defendant) and others, who obstructed construction on the property.

Arguments:

The plaintiff contended that their ownership stemmed from the 1966 sale deed, thus the dispute for possession arose post that date. Meanwhile, the defendants claimed adverse possession dating back to 1944, asserting their right over the property. The High Court ruled in favor of the defendants, holding that adverse possession had been perfected by them before the plaintiff’s claim.

Court’s Judgement:

The Supreme Court observed that tenants cannot assert adverse possession against their landlords, as their possession remains permissive. Notably, the defendants were tenants, rendering their possession permissive against the landlords since 1944. The Court emphasized that the plaintiff’s ownership postdated the claimed period of adverse possession. Therefore, the dispute for possession arose only after the 1966 sale deed. As the suit was filed within 12 years from the deed, it was deemed timely. The Court upheld the First Appellate Court’s decree, maintaining that the 12-year period for adverse possession commenced in 1966, and the 1975 suit fell within this time frame.