Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Mohammad Shafi Vs. Babu Bindeshari Singh

Mohammad Shafi vs Babu Bindeshari Singh

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Feb 10, 1922
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/471091

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Trespass - Planting trees on another's land--Suit for possession--Limitation. -

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mohammad Shafi

Respondent

Babu Bindeshari Singh

Legal References

Reported In
70Ind.Cas.483

Excerpt

trespass - planting trees on another's land--suit for possession--limitation. - walsh, j.1. i agree with the judgment of the court below. i think this is an action for trespass and for possession of the land. the plaintiff was prepared to allow the defendants to remove the trees. that is not the same thing as an action for removal of the trees. the learned judge below has decreed possession. so far as the suit for possession is concerned, the period is twelve years. the defendants set up title and claimed adverse possession. i think the planting of trees one another person's land is an active trespass and, certainly, the owner is entitled to treat it as such if he wishes. the period is twelve years. i do not think musharf ali v. iftkhar hussain 10 a. 634 : a.w.n. (1888) 257 : 6 ind. dec. (n.s.) 427 applies. i have great doubts whether i should agree, with it, if it did. the appeal is dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

Walsh, J.

1. I agree with the judgment of the Court below. I think this is an action for trespass and for possession of the land. The plaintiff was prepared to allow the defendants to remove the trees. That is not the same thing as an action for removal of the trees. The learned Judge below has decreed possession. So far as the suit for possession is concerned, the period is twelve years. The defendants set up title and claimed adverse possession. I think the planting of trees one another person's land is an active trespass and, certainly, the owner is entitled to treat it as such if he wishes. The period is twelve years. I do not think Musharf Ali v. Iftkhar Hussain 10 A. 634 : A.W.N. (1888) 257 : 6 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 427 applies. I have great doubts whether I should agree, with it, if it did. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial