Ownership Archives

Issue of limitation cannot be decided without recording of evidence, once it becomes a mixed question of law and fact: Delhi High Court upholds Trial Court’s dismissal of Order 7 Rule 11

Delhi High Court held that the dismissal of the petitioner’s application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was warranted, emphasizing the need to focus solely on the allegations in the plaint at the preliminary stage because the issues regarding limitation and adverse possession required further evidence and examination, which could not be resolved without a full trial.

Case Briefs High Courts

Declaration of status or right/title to property is a relief in personam and is arbitrable: Delhi High Court

“Only when the subject matter of the dispute relates to actions in rem, that do not relate to subordinate rights in personam arising from rights in rem, the subject matter will be non-arbitrable.”

Case Briefs High Courts

J&K and Ladakh HC modifies a 5-year-old Trial Court order restraining a man from opening the windows of his house

The High Court opined that the petitioner has a right of opening of windows on his property even if they are facing towards the house of the respondent.

Case Briefs High Courts

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner has no authority to revoke exemption for Jute Mill under Employees’ Provident Funds Act, 1952: Calcutta High Court

Calcutta High Court emphasised that the appropriate Government has not cancelled or amended the terms of the exemption under Section 17 of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

Case Briefs District Court

Landlord cannot refuse to take over possession of suit property upon determination of lease on pretext of damage to the property; Patiala House Court reiterates

The landlord was offered the possession of the suit property which was refused by him on the pretext of damage to the suit property, whereas no evidence has been adduced by him about damage to the suit property except his bald statements.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Whether power of attorney, will, agreement to sell can be recognised as title documents conferring rights in any immovable property? Supreme Court answers

Supreme Court said that the entry of the appellant over part of the suit property is simply as a licencee of the respondent. He does not continue to occupy it in the capacity of the owner. Thus, the licence having been terminated, he has no right to remain in possession but to restore possession to the person having rightful possessory title over it.

Op Eds OP. ED.

ChatGPT and the IP Implications of the Output Created by it

by Rohan Khosla†

Case Briefs High Courts

First proviso to Rule 55-A of TN Registration Rules ultra vires and unconstitutional to the Registration Act, as well as the substantive provisions of TP Act: Madras High Court

Madras High Court said that Rule 55-A is delegated legislation which cannot go beyond the scope of the Parent Act viz., the Registration Act as well the Transfer of Property Act which is the substantive law governing the transfer of immovable properties. Hence, it is held that the first proviso is clearly ultra vires and unconstitutional.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act applies on transferee who makes improvements in good faith on a property, believing himself to be its absolute owner: Supreme Court

Supreme Court upheld the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s order holding the respondent as the owner of the encroached land, as an encroacher cannot claim benefit of Section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Case Briefs Supreme Court

Defendants cannot be dispossessed unless the plaintiff has established a better title and rights over the property, Supreme Court reiterates

The Supreme Court observed that the defendants, being in possession, would be entitled to protect and save their possession, unless the person who seeks to dispossess them has a better legal right in the form of ownership or entitlement to possession.

Case Briefs High Courts

Delhi High Court grants ex parte ad interim injunction to Sukam Systems (P) Ltd. for its trade mark ‘Su-Kam’ against Lithium Power Energy (P) Ltd in a trade mark infringement suit

In the present case, Sukam Systems (P) Ltd. alleged infringement and passing of by Lithium Power Energy (P) Ltd. of its registered trade marks ‘Su-Kam’, ‘BIG conqueror Tubular Battery’ and ‘BIG Warrior Tubular Battery’.

Case Briefs Foreign Courts

AFCHPR| Republic of Kenya directed to identify and demarcate the Ogiek ancestral land and make monetary reparations to the community for the moral and material prejudices suffered

African Court on Human and People’s Rights (‘AFCHPR’): While deciding the instant matter concerning the eviction of a Kenyan indigenous minority ethnic

Case Briefs High Courts

Once tenant starts paying rent, can he/she turn around and challenge title of landlord? Del HC examines

Delhi High Court: In a matter with regard to the grant of leave to defend, Subramonium Prasad, J., expressed that, the tenant

Case Briefs High Courts

Ill-treatment meted out to respondent-mother, expelled from her own house, allegations of mental, physical and social abuse; Raj HC directs petitioner-son to vacate the house with his family

Rajasthan High Court: Sameer Jain J. dismissed the petition and refused to interfere with the impugned order. Factual Background The facts of

Case Briefs High Courts

Who ‘owns’ a YouTube channel?: Del HC passes interim directions in dispute over channel ‘Shabad Kirtan Gurbani – Divine Amrit Bani’

Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., is considering a very interesting case where the dispute between the parties is regarding the ownership

Op Eds OP. ED.

Whose Assets are they Anyway?

by Pramod Rao†
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 15

Case Briefs

Competition Commission of South Africa interdicts transaction to acquire Burger King | Read how merger would have impacted ‘Historically Disadvantaged Persons’?

Competition Commission of South Africa in a statement prohibited the transaction proposed by ECP Africa intended to acquire Burger King (South Africa)

Op Eds OP. ED.

Ownership – Meaning and modes of acquiring

by Achal Gupta†

Case Briefs High Courts

P&H HC | There is no requirement in law that a person applying for sanction of the building plan, has to prove his ownership before the building plan can be sanctioned

Punjab and Haryana High Court: Anil Kshetarpal, J., while addressing the instant petition against the impugned order of Deputy Commissioner expressed that,

Case Briefs Supreme Court

To prove case under NDPS Act, ownership of the vehicle not required to be established and proved

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and MR Shah, JJ has held that to prove the case