adverse occupation property rules
5 years ago
My parents are having dda flat in delhi. We got flat through DDA draw scheme. Flat is in the name of my maternal uncle(mom's brother). My father applied ON HIS BEHALF and his name came in draw, that time my father asked him to take occupation, he told he is not interested, so my parents took possession and paid all money for flat and started living in flat since 1995. Though flat is in his name , he has not paid any money for the flat. we did all renovation and paid all money for this flat and occupying it since last 23 years. Now suddenly he told that we should vacate the flat, else he will send legal notice .I request you to give advice on what can be done in this matter as registration is not done for the flat. Flat is in maternal uncle name but all money is being paid by us to DDA , WE have all documents of the flat and even electricity bill comes in my father's name, we have aadhaar card and voter id also as residential proof. kindly advice how to get flat transferred in parents name as they are in possession of this flat for last 23 years.Is it possible that he can throw us out of the flat.i wanted to know who will be the legal owner of the flat according to property act. Regards,
Attachments
Be assured that if they go to court by filing the suit for possession or with any other relief it will take 5-6 years. Till then you can enjoy the property and by the by you can put up claim to title by way of adverse possession. The law is as follows:
========================================================================================================
ADVERSE POSSESSION
There are many judgments and the recent one is as follows:
======================================================================
Protest within 12 years or lose property to squatter
======================================================================
ONE THE ABOVE FORMULA THE OPPOSITE PARTY LOSE ITS CASE.
If a person does not protest someone illegally occupying his property for 12 years, then the squatter would get ownership rights over that property, the Supreme Court has ruled.
A bench of Justices R K Agrawal and A M Sapre said if a person proved actual, peaceful and uninterrupted possession of a property owned by another for more than 12 years, “a case of adverse possession can be held to be made out which, in turn, results in depriving the true owner of his ownership rights in the property and vests ownership rights of the property in the person who claims it”.
However, the bench put in a caveat by ruling that such a person (squatter) must necessarily first admit ownership of the true owner over the property and make the true owner a party to the suit before a court for claiming ownership over the property through adverse possession.
This ruling came in a case where a Muslim man had claimed ownership over a property through adverse possession in Jalgaon of Maharashtra. He had attempted to advance the plea of adverse possession to claim ownership rights over the property, which was inherited by a Muslim woman after the death of her father.
Setting aside a Bombay high court order in favour of the man, the SC bench said, “When both courts below held and, in our view rightly, that the defendant has failed to prove the plea of adverse possession, then such concurrent finding of fact was unimpeachable and binding on the HC. The HC erred fundamentally in observing that it was not necessary for the defendant to first admit the ownership of the plaintiff before raising such a plea.”
GANESH SHARMA
Responded 5 years ago
Nirmal Chopra
Responded 5 years ago
GANESH SHARMA
Responded 5 years ago