Suit for Title

Suit for declaration of title - Entry made in the book of endowments  - Burden to prove ownership over the suit property is on the plaintiff – Plaintiffs have strongly relied upon the book of endowments as maintained by the Endowment Department which shows the boundaries of the adjoining temple situated to the west of the suit property which is shown as Endowments property by the Endowments department and where the eastern and southern boundaries of the temple are shown to be the house of the plaintiffs - High court by solely relying on the entry made in the book of endowments department decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiffs – This document alone is not sufficient to claim the title over the suit premises as it was only intended to demarcate the adjoining temple premises. (2018)2 SCeJ 1843

PLR Supreme Court e@journal

 Annual subscription Rs. 1000/-

4-5 UPDATES A WEEK   / Full text with Headnotes through email / WhatsApp

 FREE with


 Annual subscription Rs. 2800/- (2019) / 9463598502

Suit for declaration of title - Plaintiffs relied on permissions granted by the municipality, property tax assessment papers, tax receipts and extract of the Book of Endowments of adjoining Ram Mandir - Plaintiffs also relied on the permission granted in their favour by the municipality, for reroofing  - The several permissions of the municipality and tax receipts might imply possession but they cannot be relied to confer title upon the holder. (2018)2 SCeJ 1843

The provisions of Section 101 of the Evidence Act provide that the burden of proof of the facts rests on the party who substantially asserts it and not on the party who denies it. In fact, burden of proof means that a party has to prove an allegation before he is entitled to a judgment in his favour. Section 103 provides that burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any special law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person. The provision of Section 103 amplifies the general rule of Section 101 that the burden of proof lies on the person who asserts the affirmative of the facts in issue. - Parimal v. Veena (2011)3 SCC 545


Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.