Bangalore Land Dispute: Supreme Court Rules Against Adverse Possession Claim

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Bangalore Development Authority vs. N. Jayamma, addressed a land dispute involving adverse possession claims over a property in Bangalore. The ruling, delivered by Justices A.K. Sikri and R.K. Agrawal, overturned lower court judgments and dismissed the respondent’s claim of adverse possession.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose when N. Jayamma filed a suit seeking ownership of land in Survey No. 76/1 in Bangalore. She claimed to have purchased the property in 1994 and remained in continuous possession for over 12 years, thereby perfecting her title through adverse possession. However, the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) contended that the land was acquired by the government in 1984, with possession transferred to BDA in 1988.

Key Legal Issues

• Can a person claim adverse possession over land acquired by the government?
• Did the respondent meet the legal requirement of continuous, open, and hostile possession for 12 years?
• Was the lower court correct in granting ownership to the respondent?

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s Arguments (Bangalore Development Authority)

The BDA contended that once the government acquired the land, it vested with the authority and could not be sold further. They argued that the respondent’s claim was invalid as possession was taken in 1988. They also pointed out that under Article 112 of the Limitation Act, a claim of adverse possession against the government requires 30 years, not 12.

Respondent’s Arguments (N. Jayamma)

The respondent claimed that she had been in uninterrupted possession of the land for over 12 years and had thereby perfected her ownership through adverse possession. She also argued that the BDA had never physically occupied the land despite the acquisition.

Supreme Court’s Observations

Justice A.K. Sikri, delivering the judgment, stated:

“The respondent has not been able to prove title by adverse possession, as there is no evidence of continuous, open, and hostile possession for the statutory period.”

The Court found that the respondent was in possession for only seven years before being evicted in 2001, making her claim of adverse possession invalid.

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, dismissing the respondent’s suit and affirming that the land belonged to the Bangalore Development Authority. The Court ruled that possession was legally taken in 1988 and that the respondent’s claim was based on an invalid sale.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Bangalore Developmen vs N. Jayamma Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 10-03-2016-1741853859600.pdf