Srinagar: If a person has been allowed to stay in the premises gratuitously, he does not acquire any title over the property, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh has said.
Dismissing an appeal by an industrial house, a bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar said, “the Courts would not be justified in protecting the possession of any person who was allowed to occupy the premises for some time gratuitously”.
The appeal was filed by one M/S M R Industries against an order by additional district judge, Srinagar in 2013, by virtue of which government rejected suit seeking directions to restrain it from interfering with the use and occupation of plot of land at Industrial Estate Zainakote, Srinagar.
The court said, “the protection can only be granted or extended to a person who has a valid subsisting rent agreement, lease agreement or license agreement in his favour”, adding, “therefore, a person holding a premises gratuitously and whose initial entry in the premises is questionable, would not acquire any right or interest in the property and even long possession in that capacity would be of no legal consequence.”
It further said: “in the instant case, as per plaintiff’s (M/S M. R. Industries) own case he was allowed to occupy the additional plot of land in question by the defendants without any formal allotment.”
It held that the plot of land admittedly belongs to a third person who is a migrant.
“Therefore, there is no legal right or interest created in favour of the plaintiff in this case, so as to entitle him to remain in possession of the suit land. Thus, there is no prima facie case in favour of the appellant/plaintiff. For this reason alone, the appellant/plaintiff is not entitled to gra
