Daily Current Affairs : 5-June-2024
Adverse possession is a legal principle that allows a person to claim ownership of a property if they have occupied it openly, continuously, and without the permission of the original owner for a specified period. This concept encourages the active use of land, preventing it from being left vacant. However, recent discussions have raised concerns about whether the law still serves its original purpose or if it promotes false claims.
How Adverse Possession Works
- Possession Requirements: The person claiming adverse possession must occupy the land openly, without the owner’s consent, and continuously for a specified period.
- Example: If Person A neglects their land, Person B may start using it. If Person B remains on the land for the required time without any objection from Person A, they can claim ownership.
- Duration: According to the Limitation Act of 1963, a person can claim ownership of private land after 12 years of continuous, undisputed possession. For government land, the duration is 30 years.
Origin and Legal Framework
The concept of adverse possession has historical origins, especially in English law. It was developed to prevent land from being left idle and encourage productive use. Over time, this legal doctrine became codified, and the Limitation Act of 1963 set clear guidelines for claiming adverse possession. A key feature of the law is that the burden of proof falls on the person claiming possession. They must demonstrate that they have met all the necessary conditions to prove ownership.
Supreme Court’s View and Concerns
In 2004, the Supreme Court of India raised concerns about the law of adverse possession. The Court emphasized that the law could be unfair to rightful property owners, as it allows individuals to claim land that they have not genuinely worked on or cared for. This could turn into a windfall for dishonest individuals. The Court also argued that this practice burdens the courts and promotes unnecessary litigation, without benefiting the public or preventing land from being left unused.
The Law Commission’s Report
In its recent report, the Law Commission of India concluded that no changes are needed to the law of adverse possession. The majority of the members agreed that the existing law is adequate. However, two members dissented, arguing that the law encourages fraudulent claims and should be abolished. These dissenting members believe that adverse possession leads to the wrongful appropriation of land, often benefiting those who have not been the rightful custodians of the property.
Important Points:
Definition of Adverse Possession: A legal principle where a person can claim ownership of land if they occupy it openly and continuously for a specified period without the owner’s permission.
Possession Requirements:
- Occupation must be open, continuous, and without consent from the original owner.
- The claimant must prove they’ve been in possession for the required time.
Example: If Person A neglects their land, Person B can occupy and care for it. After the legal period, Person B can claim ownership if no objection is raised.
Duration for Claiming Ownership:
- 12 years for private land (under the Limitation Act of 1963).
- 30 years for government land.
Origin of the Concept:
- Rooted in English law, developed to prevent land from being left idle and encourage its use.
Legal Framework:
- The Limitation Act of 1963 shifted the burden of proof to the claimant.
- The claimant must provide evidence of the duration, nature, and continuity of possession.
Supreme Court’s Concerns:
- The law may unfairly benefit dishonest individuals by allowing them to claim land they have not truly cared for or improved.
- The law burdens the judicial system by encouraging false claims and unnecessary litigation.
Law Commission’s Report:
- Majority opinion: No changes are needed to the current law.
- Dissenting opinion: The law encourages fraudulent claims and should be abolished to prevent wrongful land appropriation.
Why In News
The Law Commission in its recent report concluded that no changes are needed to the law on adverse possession, affirming its current applicability. However, two members dissented, arguing that the law encourages fraudulent claims and should be abolished, as it leads to the wrongful appropriation of land by individuals who have not been its rightful custodians.
MCQs about Adverse Possession
-
What is the main concept of adverse possession?
A. A person can claim ownership of land by purchasing it legally.
B. A person can claim ownership of land if they occupy it openly and continuously for a specified period.
C. A person can claim ownership of land only through a legal contract with the original owner.
D. A person can claim ownership of land by paying taxes for it.
-
According to the Limitation Act of 1963, how long does one have to occupy private land before claiming ownership through adverse possession?
A. 5 years
B. 10 years
C. 12 years
D. 20 years
-
What was the Supreme Court’sprimary concern regarding the law of adverse possession in India?
A. It may allow rightful owners to lose their land.
B. It leads to the wrongful appropriation of land by dishonest individuals.
C. It is not effective in promoting land use.
D. It does not address issues related to government land.
-
In its recent report, the Law Commission of India concluded that:
A. The law of adverse possession should be abolished.
B. No changes are needed to the law of adverse possession.
C. The law should allow adverse possession only for 5 years.
D. The law should only apply to government land.
Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions
