{"id":254532,"date":"2021-09-22T09:00:05","date_gmt":"2021-09-22T03:30:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=254532"},"modified":"2021-09-23T16:35:19","modified_gmt":"2021-09-23T11:05:19","slug":"long-possession-of-a-property-by-a-caretaker-servant-will-entitle-him-to-acquire-an-interest-in-property","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/22\/long-possession-of-a-property-by-a-caretaker-servant-will-entitle-him-to-acquire-an-interest-in-property\/","title":{"rendered":"Will long possession of a property by a caretaker\/servant entitle him to acquire an interest in property? SC decides"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: Holding that caretaker\/servant can never acquire interest in the property irrespective of his long possession, <\/strong>Bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka, JJ., held that trial court committed manifest error in appreciating the pleadings on record from plaint filed at the instance of a caretaker\/servant.<\/p>\n

Appellant-defendant approached this Court assailing the decision of lower court on the application filed at his instance under Order VII Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code, 1908.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/span><\/h3>\n

Appellant-defendant initially entered into an agreement to sell of the subject property and after a formal conveyance deed a sale deed was executed and his right of ownership over the subject property in question became absolute.<\/p>\n

Respondent 1-plaintiff submitted that he was in possession of the subject property as a caretaker\/servant.<\/p>\n

Respondent-1-plaintiff\u2019s prayer was:<\/p>\n