Dear friends,
The Supreme Court, in its decision given on 21.3.2012 (copy attached), has held that no one acquires title to the property if he or she was allowed to stay in the premises gratuitously. Even with long possession of years or decades, such a person would not acquire any right or interest in the said property. It further held that a caretaker, watchman, or servant can never acquire an interest in the property, regardless of their long possession. The caretaker or servant has to give up possession of the property forthwith on demand. The Apex Court also laid fresh guidelines that caretakers, watchmen, or servants do not acquire any title to a property merely because of its possession by them for several years.
The court further observed that litigation pertaining to valuable real estate properties is dragged on by unscrupulous litigants in the hope that the other party will tire out and ultimately settle with them by paying a huge amount, which happens due to the enormous delay in the adjudication of cases in our courts. If a pragmatic approach is adopted, then this problem can be minimized to a large extent.
The apex court passed the ruling while upholding an appeal of Maria Margarida Sequeria Fernandes, who was embroiled in a two-decade-long legal battle with her brother and former Member of Parliament Erasmo Jack de Sequeria, whom she had appointed as a caretaker of her property in Goa.
Thanks,
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1446The Supreme Court, in its decision given on 21.3.2012 (copy attached), has held that no one acquires title to the property if he or she was allowed to stay in the premises gratuitously. Even with long possession of years or decades, such a person would not acquire any right or interest in the said property. It further held that a caretaker, watchman, or servant can never acquire an interest in the property, regardless of their long possession. The caretaker or servant has to give up possession of the property forthwith on demand. The Apex Court also laid fresh guidelines that caretakers, watchmen, or servants do not acquire any title to a property merely because of its possession by them for several years.
The court further observed that litigation pertaining to valuable real estate properties is dragged on by unscrupulous litigants in the hope that the other party will tire out and ultimately settle with them by paying a huge amount, which happens due to the enormous delay in the adjudication of cases in our courts. If a pragmatic approach is adopted, then this problem can be minimized to a large extent.
The apex court passed the ruling while upholding an appeal of Maria Margarida Sequeria Fernandes, who was embroiled in a two-decade-long legal battle with her brother and former Member of Parliament Erasmo Jack de Sequeria, whom she had appointed as a caretaker of her property in Goa.
Thanks,
From India, Malappuram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.