When it is not necessary for plaintiff to claim declaration in suit for possession?

We   need   to   ascertain,   at   the   outset,   the   correct   Article   of   the
Schedule to the Limitation Act, under which the present suit falls.   Is it
Article 58 as claimed by Defendant No.2, since the suit seeks a declaration
that  the  Defendants have  no right,  title  or  interest  to occupy the  suit
structure   and   prays   for   a   decree   of   possession   on   the   basis   of   such

declaration, or is it, as claimed by the Plaintiffs,  Article 65, which provides
for   a   suit   to   recover   possession   of   immovable   property   based   on   the
plaintiff's title.  The answer is to be found in the Supreme Court judgment
in   the   case   of    State   of   Maharashtra   Vs.   Pravin   Jethalal   Kamdar1
.
Whenever a suit is filed to recover possession of immovable property based
on title, which the present suit undoubtedly is, there is no need for the
plaintiff to seek any declaration.  The suit must come within Article 65 and
the period of limitation would be 12 years.   The fact that the plaintiff
actually seeks a declaration is of no consequence.  
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
  ORIGINAL SIDE
SUIT NO.2067 OF 2009
 Sharad Shantilal Chheda V  Concord Builders,

     CORAM  :  S.C.GUPTE, J.
    
Dated :  28 JULY 2016
Citation: 2017(2) ALLMR 251

Print Page

Whether it is necessary to claim declaration in suit for possession?

However, it

 has been submitted on behalf of the plaintiffs that the

 main relief of the plaintiffs is recovery of possession

 based on title of the plaintiffs and that the suit of

 the plaintiffs is basically for recovery of possession.

 There is no doubt about it. Reliance is placed In the

 case of Corporation of the City of Bangalore v. M.

 Papaiah and another reported in A.I.R. 1989 S.C.

 1809. It was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court

 that a suit cannot be dismissed on the ground that the

 relief of declaration of title and possession has not

 been specifically mentioned in the plaint. In the case

 of Uchhab Gouda and others v. Ganesh Panda (A.I.R.

 1963 Orissa, 71) it was observed that it is not in the

 least necessary for a plaintiff in a suit for

 possession to claim a declaration. Indeed declarations

 in the true sense are rarely required. The plaintiff

 should only allege the facts necessary to establish his

 title and that the defendant is wrongfully in

 possession. If he goes on to claim, in the manner so

 beloved of pleaders, a declaration of title in addition

 to an order for possession, the Court may and should

 treat the case as a claim for possession pure and

 simple and ignore entirely the claim for a ’declaration

 of title’. In the case of The State of Maharashtra and 

 others v. Glaxo Laboratories (India) Pvt. Ltd. and

 another (1979 Bom. C.R.321),the Division Bench of this

 Court has held that a suit for a declaratory decree can

 only be a suit of the type specified in the said

 Section 34, and merely because a plaintiff choses in

 the plaint to ask for declarations which are really

 answers in his favour to issues which arise in the suit

 does not make that suit a declaratory suit or a suit

 for a declaratory decree. Again, in the case of Tanaji

 M. Shetkar vs. Rukmini P. Shetkar, (1991 (2) GLT

 153), it has been held that there is no necessity to

 seek declaration in a suit for injunction based on

 title. 

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

FIRST APPEAL NO. 89 OF 1996

  Shri Gopal Balcrishna Fallary,

 V

  State of Goa,

CORAM: N. A. BRITTO, J.

 DATED: 6.04.2004

 Citation:2004 (3) ALLMR 335

Print Page

Good legal article on verification of Title of Immovable Property

Rapid industrial development and unbridled urbanisation have seen the demand for land for development of residential, commercial and industrial complexes, and even for farmhouses rise tremendously, resulting in sky-high prices. Alienation of real estate is specially taking place in villages situated within a radius of 1-20 km of urban industrial and commercial centres. Land parcels are generally purchased through socially advanced, often unscrupulous persons, or rich agriculturists possessing sufficient muscle power and skills to persuade, deceive and exploit the poor farmer. As a result, widespread deceit and exploitation is seen in almost all land alienations. It is, therefore, essential to have a fair idea of the guidelines of investigation of title.

Title is a legal term; it means the ownership right to property. When search is conducted unto the property of the person who owns it, it is called the Investigation of Title.

Print Page