IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** R.S.A. No.412 of 1986 Date of Decision:22.12.2010 Kartar Singh (dead) through LRs .....Appellant Vs. Sewak Singh and others .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present:- Mr. G.S. Punia, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.1 to 3. Mr. M.S. Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.18. **** RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J. (Oral) This is defendant's second appeal challenging judgment and decrees of the Courts below whereby suit of the plaintiff - respondents for declaration and injunction was decreed by the Courts below holding them to be owners of the suit property on the basis of adverse possession. While decreeing the suit, the trial Court on the basis of evidence on record held that the plaintiff- respondents were in open and hostile possession of the property in dispute and their possession has ripen into the ownership by way of adverse possession. Though the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that the following substantial questions of law arise in this appeal:- 1. Whether plea of possessory title can be raised against true owner? R.S.A. No.412 of 1986 -2- 2. Whether plea of adverse possession can be raised by the plaintiff? 3. Whether plea of adverse possession and claiming ownership on basis of exchange are contradictory to each other? 4. Whether misreading of pleading and evidence itself raises a question of law? 5. Whether the courts below has misread the entries in revenue record and misreading of entries raises substantial question of law? 6. Whether judgments of courts below suffers from perversity of reasoning and perversity is itself is a question of law? however, after hearing learned counsel for the appellant, this Court vide order dated 2.12.2010, framed the following substantial question of law which arises in this appeal:- “Whether suit for declaration of title on the basis of adverse possession filed by the plaintiff is maintainable?” In view of the judgment of this Court in Bhim Singh and others v. Zile Singh and others, 2006(3) RCR Civil 97 and State of Haryana v. Mukesh Kumar and others (R.S.A. No.3909 of 2008) decided on 17.3.2009, the aforesaid substantial question of law as framed by this Court has to be allowed in favour of the appellant and against the plaintiff- respondents as it has been authoritatively laid down in the aforesaid judgments that a suit for declaration of title on the basis of adverse possession filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable. R.S.A. No.412 of 1986 -3- Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents were unable to controvert the aforesaid proposition of law as held in the aforesaid judgments of this Court. Thus relying upon the aforesaid judgments, this appeal is allowed and the judgments and decrees of the Courts below are set aside and suit of the plaintiff- respondents is ordered to be dismissed. No costs. December 22, 2010 ( RAKESH KUMAR GARG ) renu JUDGE