https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314349 A second appeal is maintainable only on a framed substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC, and interference with findings of fact without meeting that threshold is impermissible. In the cited matter, the High Court's second appellate interference was found inconsistent with Section 100 and was reversed. On adverse possession against Government land, the claimant must prove open, continuous, exclusive and hostile possession with animus possidendi for the statutory period through clear pleading and cogent evidence; vague testimony and estimates were insufficient. The plea failed, the State's title was restored, and the respondents were not entitled to declaration of title over public land. en-us Wed, 09 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Jun 2024 15:28:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314349 A second appeal is maintainable only on a framed substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC, and interference with findings of fact without meeting that threshold is impermissible. In the cited matter, the High Court's second appellate interference was found inconsistent with Section 100 and was reversed. On adverse possession against Government land, the claimant must prove open, continuous, exclusive and hostile possession with animus possidendi for the statutory period through clear pleading and cogent evidence; vague testimony and estimates were insufficient. The plea failed, the State's title was restored, and the respondents were not entitled to declaration of title over public land. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314349