https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302892 Adverse possession against a co-owner was not made out because possession by a family member managing endowed property and religious affairs did not, by itself, amount to ouster or hostile occupation. The Limitation Act, 1908 required clear proof that the eldest brother and later the appellant held the property adversely for twelve years, and the record contained no specific issue, cross-examination, or inquiry on that point. The circumstances were consistent with joint family possession and did not show a denial of the plaintiff's rights. The plea of limitation therefore failed, and the plaintiff's right to joint possession and management was upheld. en-us Mon, 13 Dec 1943 00:00:00 +0630 Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:44:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302892 Adverse possession against a co-owner was not made out because possession by a family member managing endowed property and religious affairs did not, by itself, amount to ouster or hostile occupation. The Limitation Act, 1908 required clear proof that the eldest brother and later the appellant held the property adversely for twelve years, and the record contained no specific issue, cross-examination, or inquiry on that point. The circumstances were consistent with joint family possession and did not show a denial of the plaintiff's rights. The plea of limitation therefore failed, and the plaintiff's right to joint possession and management was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 13 Dec 1943 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302892