...interest and that the latter had acquiesced to his illegal possession during the entire period of 12 years, i.e, up to completing the period of his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. Since...

...facie evidence of title. Party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession must be ‘nec vi, nec clam, nec precario’ i.e peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be adequate, in...

...possession by clearly asserting hostile title in denial of the title of the true owner. It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is “nec vi, nec clam, ...the period his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. Since the appellant's claim is founded on Section 53-A, it goes without saying that he admits by implication that he came into...perfected their title by adverse possession and consequential relief for permanent injunction. There are three sets of properties in each of these three matters. One is CTS No. 24 of Ward No. VI...

....)”22. A peaceful, open and continuous possession as engraved in the maxim nec vi, nec clam, nec precario has been noticed by this Court in...p. 395e-f)“… [the words ‘as of right’] import the absence of any of the three characteristics of compulsion, secrecy, or licence—‘nec vi, nec clam, nec precario’,...(2003) 3 WLR 1306, (2004) 1 All ER 160 same test was referred to.29. Thus the test of nec vi, nec clam, nec precario i.e “not by force...

...be nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. After considering the entire case-law in that behalf, the learned Single Judge has held thus:“The contention raised by the...23, has observed that the ordinary classical requirement of adverse possession is that it should be nec vi, nec clam, nec precario and the possession required must be adequate in continuity, in...

...claim or possession of the other party; all three classic requirements must coexist- nec vi, i.e., adequate in continuity; nec clam, i.e., adequate in publicity; and nec precario, i.e., adverse to...(1993) 4 SCC 375 held that“Party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession must be ‘nec vi, nec clam, ...) (2004) 10 SCC 779 it was held:—“It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is “...

...78, AIR 1934 PC 23 it was observed that the ordinary classical requirement of adverse possession is that it should be nec vi, nec clam, ...that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is ‘nec vi, nec clam, nec precario’, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be adequate in continuity, ...

...), filed a second appeal which was allowed by the High Court by the impugned judgment dated 17-8-2000. The High Court relying on several decisions held that the ingredients of adverse possession (nec vi, nec clam, ...that the ingredients of plea of adverse possession (nec vi, nec clam, nec precario) had been established by the appellant-defendant. Hence there is no force in these appeals which are accordingly...

.... Lakshmi Reddy . AIR 1957 SC 314, 1957 SCR 195 adverted to the ordinary classical requirement — that it should be nec vi, nec clam, nec precario — that...

...nec vi, nec clam, nec precario meaning thereby that adverse possession is proved only when possession is peaceful, open, continuous and hostile. The essentials of adverse possession were succinctl...clearly asserting hostile title in denial of the title of the true owner. It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is ‘nec vi, nec clam, nec ...had acquiesced to his illegal possession during the entire period of 12 years i.e. up to completing the period of his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. Since the appellant's cl...

...that it should be nec vi nec clam nec precario. (See Secretary of State for India v. Debendra Lal Khan(1)). The possession required m..., Lecture VI, at p. 159, quoting from Angell on Limitation, this Principle is stated in the following terms: " An adverse holding is an actual and exclusive appropriation of...

...period of 12 years i.e up to completing the period of his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario [not by violence, not by stealth, not by permission]. Since the appellant's claim is founded...

...concluded that he did not perfect the title because he failed to establish that the possession was ‘Nec vi nec clam nec precario’.It has been held in Parsinni v. Sukhi...(1993) 4 SCC 375 that burden of prove lies on the party claiming adverse possession. He has to plead and prove that his possession must be “nec vi, nec ...

...prove that he is in possession and that,“11. … his possession is “nec vi, nec clam, nec precario”, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be..., to constitute such adverse possession, the three classic requirements, which need to co-exist were again emphasised, nec vi i.e. adequate in continuity, nec clam i.e. adequate in publicity and nec ...illegal possession during the entire period of 12 years i.e. up to completing the period of his title by prescription nec vi, nec clam, nec precario. Since the appellant's claim is founded on Sect...

...a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is ‘nec vi, nec clam, nec precario’, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be adequate in continuity, in...

...clearly asserting hostile title in denial of the title of the true owner. It is a well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is “nec vi, nec clam, nec ...vi, nec clam, nec precario” are pleaded and proved. Both the courts below negatived the plea of adverse possession. There is no perversity or illegality in the same. The substantial questions of law.... Mere possession over the suit land for long time is not suffice to hold that the plaintiff has perfected title by way of adverse possession, unless the classical requirements of adverse possession “nec...

...concerning adverse possession is well settled, a person claiming adverse possession has to prove three classic requirements i.e. nec - nec vi, nec clam and nec precario. The trial court, ...perfecting title by adverse possession is well settled. A person claiming title by adverse possession has to prove three “neck” - nec vi, nec clam and nec precario. In other words, he must show th...requirement - that it should be nec vi, nec clam, nec precario - that is the possession required must be adequate in continuity, in publicity, and in extent to show that it is possession adverse t...

...the maxim nec vi, nec clam, nec precario, long possession by itself would not be sufficient to prove adverse possession.24. In...been done for a period of 20 years.(vi) The purported unregistered agreement in favour of Laxmibai had neither been produced nor proved. It was...

...possession should be nec vi nec clam nec precario. Their Lordships quoted with approval the decision in the case of Radhamoni Devi v. The Collector of Khulna, Indian Appeals 1900 ...well-settled principle that a party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is “nec vi, nec clam, nec precario”, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be...possession, unless the classical requirements of adverse possession nec vi, nec clam, nec precario are pleaded and proved. The findings of the courts below that the plaintiffs have perfected title...

.... 3.It is not in dispute that the defendant is in possession, but what is significant is whether she has held the property nec vi, nec clam, nec precario vis-a-vis the title of the...