Whether it is permissible to take legal plea at the stage of challenge to arbitration award U/S 34 of Arbitration Act?

We do not see any bar to plea of jurisdiction being raised by way of an objection Under Section 34 of the Act even if no such objection was raised Under Section 16.

The scheme of the Act is thus clear. All objections to jurisdiction of whatever nature must be taken at the stage of the submission of the statement of defence, and must be dealt with Under Section 16 of the Arbitration Act, 1996. However, if one of the parties seeks to contend that the subject matter of the dispute is such as cannot be dealt with by arbitration, it may be dealt Under Section 34 by the Court.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 8984-8985 of 2017

Decided On: 22.03.2018

Lion Engineering Consultants  Vs. State of M.P. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

A.K. Goel, Rohinton Fali Nariman and U.U. Lalit, JJ.

Citation: (2018) 16 SCC 758

Print Page

Supreme Court Judgments on adverse possession

In Saroop Singh v. Banto & Ors. [(2005) 8 SCC 330], in which one of us was a member, this Court held : In terms of Article 65 the starting point of limitation does not commence from the date when the right of ownership arises to the plaintiff but commences from the date the defendant s possession becomes adverse.

Animus possidendi is one of the ingredients of adverse possession. Unless the person possessing the land has a requisite animus the period for prescription does not commence. As in the instant case, the appellant categorically states that his possession is not adverse as that of true owner, the logical corollary is that he did not have the requisite animus. T. Anjanappa & Ors. v. Somalingappa & Anr. [(2006) 7 SCC 570], stating : “It is well-recognised proposition in law that mere possession however long does not necessarily mean that it is adverse to the true owner. Adverse possession really means the hostile possession which is expressly or impliedly in denial of title of the true owner and in order to constitute adverse possession the possession proved must be adequate in continuity, in publicity and in extent so as to show that it is adverse to the true owner. The classical requirements of acquisition of title by adverse possession are that such possession in denial of the true owner’s title must be peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be open and hostile enough to be capable of being known by the parties interested in the property, though it is not necessary that there should be evidence of the adverse possessor actually informing the real owner of the former s hostile action.”

Print Page