Possession is nine-tenths of the law. The famous legal phrase simply means establishing ownership is easy when the owner is in possession of the property.
In India, recovery of possession of the immovable property and establishing adverse possession on immovable property are the most common reasons people approach the courts.
When a person gives his consent or permission to another to use and possess the immovable property, such possession is called permissive possession.
A person who has rescinded his permission or has not permitted another person to use and possess his immovable property; however, such person continues to do so; such a person is in adverse possession of the immovable property.
To understand this better, we could take the example of Kumar, who is the owner of a residential flat. He has allowed his brother-in-law Shashi to use and possess the residential flat since Shashi has had a loss in business and has no place to reside. This is permissive possession.
Kumar, after two years, asks Shashi to vacate the residential flat. Shashi denies vacating and continues to be in possession of the residential flat. Shashi is in adverse possession of the residential flat.
In this circumstance, under Section 5 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, read with the Limitation Act, 1963, Kumar, who has title to the property, can claim recovery of possession of the immovable property after being dispossessed of his property by Shashi.
Kumar can institute a suit in the court within whose jurisdiction the immovable property is situated to recover possession. Kumar should institute such a suit within twelve years from the date of dispossession from the immovable property.
A person may be dispossessed from an immovable property he has title under various circumstances. For example, a purchaser of immovable property has not been handed over possession by the erstwhile owner, where on the death of a female, a person entitled to the property files a suit against another who is in possession of such property etc.
In another case, under an agreement, Kumar had rented his warehouse to Storage Prime Private Limited. As per the agreement, Storage Prime Private Limited would have to vacate the premises in the event of a breach committed by it under the agreement or at the end of the term mentioned in the agreement. Neither was Storage Prime Private Limited in breach of the agreement nor has the term under the agreement ended. However, Kumar had forcibly dispossessed Storage Prime Private Limited from the warehouse and changed the locks of the warehouse. Under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, Storage Prime Private Limited can, within six months, approach the court and be put into possession of the warehouse, as it is entitled under the agreement to use and possess the premises and cannot be dispossessed unless it has breached the agreement, or the term has ended. Here it is important to note that the title of Kumar is not in question. It is the possession of the warehouse that is in question. An entity that has a legal or permissive right to possess the property (not own) can also file a suit for recovery of possession.
In Maharashtra, a landlord can recover possession of the tenanted premises from the tenants under Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. There are various reasons under which a landlord can be put in possession of the tenanted premises few being where the tenant:
i. is using the premises other than the use that it has been given for;
ii. has constructed permanent structures;
iii. nuisance created and disturbing the other neighbours;
iv. unlawfully has sub-let the premises;
v. the landlord requires the premises for his bona fide purpose;
vi. the landlord requires to carry out repairs to the premises.
These are a few of the various reasons a landlord can get possession of the premises from the tenant.
コメント