https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196272 Title to vacant land was supported by the grant order, revenue records, survey bifurcation and admissions, while challenge to mutation entries did not defeat the underlying grant. Mandatory injunction for demolition was refused because the constructions had stood openly for decades and the plaintiff had acquiesced, making demolition inequitable. Adverse possession failed for want of clear pleadings, hostile possession and proof of ouster; bare revenue entries were insufficient. Limitation did not bar the suit because the cause for declaratory relief arose when title was challenged. Permanent injunction was granted for the vacant land, with protection against interference but excluding the constructed portion. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:27:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196272 Title to vacant land was supported by the grant order, revenue records, survey bifurcation and admissions, while challenge to mutation entries did not defeat the underlying grant. Mandatory injunction for demolition was refused because the constructions had stood openly for decades and the plaintiff had acquiesced, making demolition inequitable. Adverse possession failed for want of clear pleadings, hostile possession and proof of ouster; bare revenue entries were insufficient. Limitation did not bar the suit because the cause for declaratory relief arose when title was challenged. Permanent injunction was granted for the vacant land, with protection against interference but excluding the constructed portion. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196272