Adverse possession to solve a simple title problem

In Chow Si Hon v Estate of Chan Shui Kiu ([2012] HKEC 607) C’s grandfather bought property in Shek O Village from Madam Chan in 1948. C’s grandfather died in 1949 before any conveyance to him had been executed. In any event, Madam Chan only acquired title to the property in 1951, three years after the sale. The court declared that C and his predecessors had been in adverse possession since the sale to C’s grandfather in 1948 and that the title of Madam Chan’s estate was extinguished. The claim was unopposed. Adverse possession was used to deal with a sixty year old conveyancing problem.

Advertisements

One Response to “Adverse possession to solve a simple title problem”

  1. Mr.P.Soni Says:

    SUBJECT= LAW OF ADVERSE POSSESSION DOESN’T REQUIRE AMENDMENT AS ITS IS BEING PRACTICED ALL OVER THE WORLD , ADVERSE POSSESSION ( LIMITATION ACT 1963) IS A PERFECT LAW UNDER LIMITATION ACT OF INDIA NOTIFIED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THRU OUR PARLIAMENT , IF CHANGED IT WOULD UNDER MINE HON’BLE PARLIAMENT OF INDIA , WOULD HARRIES LACKS OF PEOPLE, WOULD FUEL UNNECESSARY LITIGATION WHICH WAS ALREADY SETTLED /BARRED BY LIMITATION ACT OF INDIA, HARASSMENT TO PUBLIC AT LARGE WHO HAD PURCHASED PROPERTY JUST BY TAKING OVER POSSESSION , RECEIPTS ETC , IT IS A PROTECTION TO POOR AND ILL LETRATE PEOPLE /FAMILY’S , THE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT State of Haryana Vs Mukesh Kumar & Ors IN THIS REGARD IS JUST A SUGGESTION AND THAT TO JUST IN RESPECT THAT “NO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT ETC SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO PERFECT THE TITLE BY INVOKING THE PROVISION OF ADVERSE POSSESION” IT IS NOT TO CHANGE ADVERSE POSSESSION LAW OR TO END IT , AS THE LAW OF ADVERSE POSSESSION UNDER & LIMITATION ACT 1963 PROTECTS LOT OF POOR PEOPLE /FAMILY IN INDIA BY VARIOUS REASON GIVEN BELOW , OVERACTIVISIM OF COURT’S SHOULD NOT OVER POWER THE DIGNITY OF HON’BLE PARTLIAMENT
    Respected Sir ,
    This petition/information is being submitted to you for NOT CHANGEING/AMEND the law of Adverse possession by the virtue to the Limitation act of India 1963 which has been selected, drafted and notified after due deliration by our selected public representative M.P’s and with cumulative mind of the Hon’ble Parliament of India which always keeps in mind the Interest of Public at large .
    If at all the said law of adverse possession in which Interest of the public as already decided by the parliament of India in regard to the law of adverse possession is change there will be following negative effect on the people of India and on other systems also
    1 The said law is existing all over the world as it reduces litigation due to the said parameters in the limitation act of India.
    2 If this law of adverse possession is changed or abolished it would be unconstitutional would undermine the honorable Parliament of India will and facilitate unnecessary litigation which were already barred by The limitation act of India ,
    3 it would also facilitate crime as criminals would be hired by the past owner’s who already lost there title by adverse possession to take possession from the current owner,
    4 it would also harass lacks of people/family’s in India who have bought properties on oral agreements , part agreements in olden days by just paying money and taking over possession due to High illiteracy rate buying property by virtue of receipt’s or just taking over possession not hiring advocates due to money shortage and just ending up making documents if at all which were not completely recognized , authorized by state and did not / were not entitled to get their names mutated in various government records as morally, constitutionally these transactions were genuine but were not documented as per the current law
    Due to above said reasons and foreseen circumstances and as time passed the said purchases/people who were in possession of their respected properties also perfected their title by adverse possession as the claimants as per the government records in every state of India already knew that they are no more owners/don’t have right over the said property as such in rural areas and in urban areas people/families are saved by the virtue of adverse possession “The Limitation Act 1968 “for illiteracy of their forefathers/their own illiteracy . This law is being practiced all over the world , also it is evident in the Indian Evidence Act the person in possession is primafaci the owner of the property More “The Concept of adverse possession exist to cure potential or actual defects in real estate titles by putting a statute of limitation on possible litigation over ownership and possession. A landowner could be secure in title to his land’ otherwise, long-lost heirs of any former owner, possessor or lien holder of centuries past could came forward with a legal clam on the property “ ,but in India we still have this situation in rural parts and as well as in modern cities due to illiteracy, lakhs of legal knowledge y,money constraints etc as such The law of adverse possession by the virtue of The Limitation act of India 1968 DON’T NOT WARRANT ANY CHANGE
    6)The intention of such statutes is not to punish one who neglects to assert rights , but to protect those who have maintained the possession for the time specified by the statue under clam of right or color of title’s or even by possession maintaining the property
    A very important thing in mind the Hon’ble parliament/ Senior Buru carts who also have responsibility of India on there shoulder’s has to keep The said law of limitation act has 1 to 137 schedule’s( Parts ) in which time frame for suit’s , appeal, recovery of money , damages ,mortgage , recovery’s , declaration etc have been framed as in such matter’s also arguments can be given :- .
    As for recovery of money the time limit is 3 years in the act , what if a person who has a genuine clams , he files suit say after 8 years , he is barred by Law already notified by the parliament of India to recover the money which he has to recover and such arguments can also be address in 137 schedules of the limitation act , which will make the WHOLE act defunct and there will be no limitation of files suits , going to court’s law will go haywire court will be filled with unnecessary litigation , there will be No cap on litigation List attached ANX 1
    Such type of arguments have also been addressed as they are in The Judgment of the hon’ble supreme court State of Haryana Vs Mukesh Kumar & Ors., about adverse possession which is covered in schedule 64 , 65 of limitation act of India like wise all this argument can be given in every section of The limitation act of India 1968 1 to 138 which means in every parliament session we will amended and abolish law , and The Supreme court is also not sure/left the decision or even not to take any decision on the issue and left it on Hon’ble Parliament , Government of India , Hon’ble President of India as such this judgment was outcome of a suit by Haryana government against a private person, moreoless if we go onto the true intension of Hon’ble Supere court , it just meant that government department should avoid/not clams title by adverse possession on private person land and in the said case the government failed to prove adverse possession/long hostile possession and other fowl in there own suit , even after 3 strong judgments of lower court . the police department of Haryana filed a appeal , which land to the above said judgment . this judgment is in a private case , such judgment , should not be treated to abolish or change a law already notified by the Government of India in the interest of public at large after due deliberation’s as such maximum, acting should be taken against the government department who filed such baseless case which made the government cut a sorry figure in front of Supreme court .
    Such arguments can be made in every schedule , THEN THE WHOLE ACT ONE BY ONE WILL CHANGE and leave the country in docks , and end the use of limitation act
    There are innumerous benefits of The limitation act of India 1968 in which adverse possession is also schedule, which are stated above more over it is a protection to lacks of poor people/family’s in India , who have been maintained the property, people who bought property just by taking over possession and giving money in return , makes less burden on judiciary as there is a set period of limitation under the act which exists all over the world , The law applies all over the world , it removed defect in title of a person in possession of a property and above stated facts
    A example judgment by the Hon’ble High court BOMBAY on 25/09/2009 in which it shows a person is saved who is in possession of his house since 1950 by the law of adverse possession Anx 2
    If the law of Limitation is changed or removed then there is 138 parts , there will be no cap in litigation , recovery , court’s will be filled with fabulous cases, In the Judgment of supreme court , it can easily be seen Over activism of judiciary , in the Constitution of India , it is clearly stated , The Hon’ble parliament who makes law’s in the interest of public as they are all selected elected representatives of the every district /state in India More over if you go thru the judgment of Supreme court of India State of Haryana Vs Mukesh Kumar & Ors., they are also not sure what to do about the law , in fact it is just a outburst of judicious on a act of a government department(police Haryana ) who intended to grab a private property , more over the said supreme court judgment has just suggested/recommended the government should not use adverse possession law against private people land ths it
    It is requested with folded hands in interest of Public at large , maintaining the Dignity of the Hon’ble parliament of India , Protecting fundamental rights of people , stop over activation of the Hon’ble Court’s NOT TO AMENDED/ABOLISH the law of adverse possession/The Limitation act 1963 of India as it would amount to Constitutional infringement , make a imbalance in law , harries lacks of people/families , facilitate crime as criminals would be hired to take possession of property from the owner who has already perfected there title by the law of adverse possession , if the law of adverse possession is changed , it would amount to lower the dignity of The Hon’ble Parliament of India who have carefully thought and made the law of the people of India and also the above state facts
    Thanking you Right’s N.G.O Q-3A Green park extension delhi

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: