Published on:18 July 2023 at 13:30 IST
Court: Supreme Court
Citation: Indore Development Authority V. Manoharlal (2020)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that in order to constitute possession, a person should be in physical control. The same is not possession unless and until the intention is there and thirdly, possibility and intention must be visible; otherwise, it is not possession. It is held that if there are two persons in a field, each asserting that the field is his, and each doing some act in the assertion of the right of possession, and if the question is, which of these two is in actual possession, then the person who has the title is in actual possession and the other person is a trespasser.
It is held that it is a well-settled principle that where possession in fact is undeterminate or the evidence is undecisive, possession in law follows the right to possess.
249. The concept of possession is complex one. It comprises the right to possess and to exclude others, essential is animus possidendi. Possession depends upon the character of the thing which is possessed. If the land is not capable of any use, mere non-user of it does not lead to the inference that the owner is not in possession.
The established principle is that the possession follows title. Possession comprises of the control over the property. The element of possession is the physical control or the power over the object and intention or will to exercise the power. Corpus and animus are both necessary and have to co-exist. Possession of the acquired land is taken under the 1894 Act under Section 16 or 17, as the case may be. The Government has a right to acquire the property for public purpose. The stage under Section 16 comes for taking possession after issuance of notification under Section 4(1) and stage of Section 9(1). Under Section 16, vesting is after passing of the award on taking possession and under Section 17 before passing of the award.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
