The Law Commission of India recently submitted a report on the concept of adverse possession in property law, concluding that no changes are required to the existing provisions under the Limitation Act of 1963. This ancient legal notion, which prevents land from being left unused and encourages its judicious usage, has been a significant element of property law worldwide. However, it has also drawn criticism for favouring dishonest trespassers at the expense of the rightful owners.
Understanding Adverse Possession
Adverse possession refers to the acquisition of property through hostile, continuous, uninterrupted, and peaceful possession, aimed at eliminating long-standing uncertainties over land ownership. The principle rewards those who make use of idle land and offers protection to those who have recognised the occupant as the property’s legal owner.
Historical Evolution and Legal Framework
The concept of “title by adverse possession” dates back to the Hammurabi Code in 2000 BC and has evolved over time through various limitation statutes in England, with the Property Limitation Act of 1874 marking a significant milestone. India introduced the law of limitation through the “Act XIV of 1859”, leading to major changes with the enactment of the Limitation Act in 1963.
Key Provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963
The Limitation Act, 1963 instituted critical provisions such as shifting the burden of proof to the claimant and enabling any person in possession of private or government land for over 12 and 30 years respectively to become the property’s owner. The act stipulates that the possession must be open, continuous, and antagonistic to the actual owner’s rights for the requisite statutory period.
Essential Features of Adverse Possession
In the 2004 case Karnataka Board of Wakf v Government of India, the Supreme Court outlined five vital elements for proving adverse possession. These include establishing the date, the nature, the recognition by the real owner, the continuity, and the openness and undisrupted nature of possession.
Criticisms and Recommendations
Despite the benefits, adverse possession has faced criticism for being harsh on the genuine owners and benefiting deceitful trespassers. The Supreme Court had once urged the government to reconsider and amend this law. In response, the Ministry of Law and Justice referred the matter to the Law Commission in 2008 for examination.
Potential Drawbacks of Adverse Possession
Detractors argue that adverse possession fuels fraudulent claims, burdens the judicial system, allows property acquisition without consent or knowledge of the true owner, and can lead to unjust outcomes. The real owner may unwittingly find their property taken over by someone with no legitimate claim, leading to a loss of property and emotional distress.
The Role of the Law Commission of India
The Law Commission of India is a non-statutory body constituted by the Government of India to conduct research in the field of law and advise the Ministry of Law and Justice. Established in 1955, it has since submitted 277 reports on various legal topics. The Law Commission, currently in its 22nd term under the chairmanship of Justice Rituraj Awasthi (Former Chief Justice of Karnataka HC), continues to play a vital role in shaping Indian legal landscape.
