38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, February 19, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Supreme Court dismisses State’s claim of adverse possession over private property, upholds citizens rights [Read Judgment]

By Saket Sourav      20 November, 2024 05:38 PM      0 Comments
Supreme Court dismisses States claim of adverse possession over private property upholds citizens rights

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has dismissed the State of Haryana’s appeal claiming adverse possession over private land, emphasizing that a welfare state cannot claim ownership of citizens’ property through adverse possession.

A division bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B Varale heard the case concerning a dispute over 18 Biswas of land in Bahadurgarh, Haryana.

The court addressed the appeal filed by the State of Haryana against the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court, which had ruled in favor of the private landowners. The court noted, “By taking the plea of adverse possession, the appellants impliedly admitted the respondents’ title. The State cannot perfect title over private property through adverse possession against its own citizens.”

Supreme Court Upholds Private Property Rights Against State Claims

Addressing the State’s claims, the court observed, “The appellants’ possession, as evidenced by the Misal Hakiyat of 1879-80, was permissive and conditional. The entry describes the possession as ‘Bikhar Bahali Kaza,’ meaning till the existence of an orchard. Such permissive possession cannot be the basis for a claim of adverse possession.”

The court emphasized the fundamental principles of property rights, stating, “The State being a welfare State governed by the rule of law cannot arrogate to itself a status beyond what is provided by the Constitution. The right to property is now considered to be not only a constitutional or statutory right but also a human right.”

In response to the State’s appeal, the court dismissed it, concluding, “The High Court’s judgment is based on sound legal principles and correct appreciation of evidence. The plaintiffs have established their ownership of the suit property, and the State cannot claim adverse possession against its own citizens.”

Adverse Possession Cannot Override Citizens’ Ownership, Rules Apex Court

The court effectively reinforced the principle that a welfare state must respect private property rights and cannot use adverse possession to appropriate citizens’ land.

Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, Additional Solicitor General, appeared for the State of Haryana.

Mr. Santosh Paul, Senior Advocate, appeared for the respondents.

Case title: The State of Haryana & Anr. Vs Amin Lal (Since Deceased) Through His LRs & Ors.

[Read Judgment]



Share this article:

About:

Saket is a law graduate from The National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam. He has a keen ...Read more

Follow:
Linkedin


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

madras-hc-directs-ms-dhoni-to-pay-10-lakh-for-transcription-of-cds-in-defamation-suit
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Directs MS Dhoni to Pay ₹10 Lakh for Transcription of CDs in Defamation Suit [Read Order]

Madras High Court directs MS Dhoni to pay ₹10 lakh for transcription and translation of CDs in his defamation suit against Zee Media.

13 February, 2026 02:36 PM
sc-holds-successive-fir-registration-to-keep-accused-in-custody-is-abuse-of-process-grants-bail-under-article-32
Trending Judiciary
SC Holds Successive FIR Registration to Keep Accused in Custody Is Abuse of Process; Grants Bail Under Article 32 [Read Order]

Supreme Court calls successive FIRs to keep accused in custody an abuse of process, grants bail under Article 32 in Jharkhand case.

13 February, 2026 02:48 PM
sc-holds-post-arbitral-award-transferee-cannot-resist-execution-reaffirms-lis-pendens-doctrine-applies-to-money-decrees
Trending Judiciary
SC Holds Post-Arbitral Award Transferee Cannot Resist Execution; Reaffirms Lis Pendens Doctrine Applies to Money Decrees [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules post-arbitral award purchasers can’t block execution; lis pendens applies to money decrees under Transfer of Property Act.

13 February, 2026 02:59 PM
sc-holds-anticipatory-bail-has-no-time-limit-protection-continues-after-chargesheet
Trending Judiciary
SC Holds Anticipatory Bail Has No Time Limit, Protection Continues After Chargesheet [Read Order]

Supreme Court rules anticipatory bail has no time limit, continues after chargesheet, and High Courts can’t restrict protection to investigation stage.

13 February, 2026 03:11 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email