The Supreme Court on Tuesday put an end to a nearly decade-long fight over a small piece of land in Maharashtra, siding with the original plaintiff who had sought recognition of ownership and possession. The bench, comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and K. Vinod Chandran, firmly rejected the appeal filed by the legal heirs of Kisan Vithoba Aakhade, noting that the earlier findings of the trial and first appellate courts had been wrongly overturned by the High Court.
Background
The dispute dates back to a modest property covered by a sale deed executed in favour of the plaintiff, Suresh Tukaram Nerkar. While the deed described 150 square metres, the defendants argued that only 109.70 square metres were in fact conveyed, and the balance was an open space long used by them for dumping manure and waste. This open patch, referred to as “PCDF” in the court records, became the bone of contention.
Initially, the trial court and the first appellate court dismissed Nerkar’s suit for declaration and injunction, relying on discrepancies in the revenue records and the absence of a possession recovery plea. But the Bombay High Court, in a second appeal, found these findings to be “perverse” and restored Nerkar’s title and possession rights.
Court’s Observations
In the apex court, counsel for the appellants insisted that the High Court had wrongly intervened. They claimed the plaintiff’s vendor never had ownership of the disputed portion and that the land was part of an ancestral partition. But the bench was not convinced.
“The Commissioner’s report only spoke of manure kept and waste dumped on the property, which cannot be a valid ground to find possession,” the bench observed, calling the contrary findings unsustainable.
Read Also:-Supreme Court Acquits Woman in Karnataka Abetment of Suicide Case After 17-Year Legal Battle
The justices also pointed out that the defendants had not produced any credible evidence of the alleged oral partition of 1974. “But for bland assertions of partition and common use, nothing is produced to establish the same,” the court said.
The court further noted a critical procedural flaw: some of the defendants, including the deceased first appellant, had not even contested the suit before the trial court but still pursued the matter in appeal. This, the bench remarked, was clearly improper.
Decision
In the final order, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s ruling, confirming Nerkar’s ownership over the entire 150 square metres covered by the sale deed. The appeal filed by the heirs of Kisan Vithoba Aakhade was dismissed in clear terms.
“For all the above reasons, we find absolutely no merit in the appeal and the same stands dismissed,” the bench declared, closing the case.
Case: Kisan Vithoba Aakhade (D) through LRs & Others vs. Suresh Tukaram Nerkar
Citation: 2025 INSC 1092
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 720 of 2015
Date of Judgment: 9 September 2025
