Limitation Act, 1963 – Art.65 – Suit under, for declaration of title – If can be filed by person claiming the title by virtue of adverse possession – Two-Judge Bench Decision of Supreme Court in Gurudwara Sahab v. Gram Panchayat Village Sirthala referring to the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in one Gurudwara Sahib Sannauli case, opined that no declaration of title can be sought by plaintiff on the basis of adverse possession inasmuch as adverse possession can be used as shield by defendant and not as sword by plaintiff – Held: Supreme Court in Gurudwara Sahab case while deciding the question simply observed that there is “no quarrel” with the proposition to the extent that suit cannot be based by the plaintiff on adverse possession – Thus, the point whether the plaintiff can take the plea of adverse possession was not contested and none of the decisions of larger and coordinate benches holding the contrary views were placed before the two-Judge Bench– Further, in the case of Gurdwara Sahib Sannauli also, there is no independent consideration –Punjab & Haryana High Court proceeded on the basis that as per Art.65, the plea of adverse possession is available as defence to a defendant – Conclusion is based on an inferential process because of the language used in the IIIrd Column of Article 65 – Column No.3 of Schedule of the Act nowhere suggests that suit cannot be filed by the plaintiff for possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title acquired by way of adverse possession – There is absolutely no bar for the perfection of title by way of adverse possession whether a person is suing as the plaintiff or being sued as a defendant – Inferential process of interpretation employed by the High Court is not permissible– There is no bar u/ Art.65 or any of the provisions of the 1963 Act as against the plaintiff who has perfected title by virtue of adverse possession to sue for eviction of a person or to protect his possession – Decisions of Supreme Court in Gurudwara Sahab, in Mandir Shri Lakshmi Siddh Maharaj relying on Gurudwara Sahab and in Punjab Wakf Board case cannot be said to be laying down the law correctly and thus are overruled – Possession – Adverse Possession – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.6. Possession – Adverse Possession – Effect of adverse possession as against limited owner – Discussed. Possession – Adverse Possession – Concept of – Held: Statute does not define adverse possession – It is a common law concept, the period of which has been prescribed statutorily as 12 years – Law of limitation does not define adverse possession nor anywhere contains a provision that the plaintiff cannot sue based on adverse possession – Under Art.64 also suit can be filed based on the possessory title – Limitation Act, 1963 – s.27 and Art.64. Possession – Adverse Possession – Title acquired by – Nature of – Discussed. Limitation Act, 1963 – Operation of – Held: Operation of the statute of limitation in giving a title is merely negative – It extinguishes the right and title of the dispossessed owner and leaves the occupant with a title gained by the fact of possession and resting on the infirmity of the right of others to eject him. Words & Expressions – “title”, “tacking”– Meaning of – Discussed – Limitation Act, 1963 – Art.65. Words & Expressions – “ownership”, “possession” – Kinds of – Discussed. Possession – Adverse Possession – Proof of – Requirements for – Held: Adverse possession requires all the three classic requirements to co-exist at the same time, namely, nec-vi i.e. adequate in continuity, nec-clam i.e., adequate in publicity and nec-precario i.e. adverse to a competitor, in denial of title and his knowledge. Possession – Adverse Possession – When not – Held: Trespasser’s long possession is not synonym with adverse possession – Trespasser’s possession is construed to be on behalf of the owner, the casual user does not constitute adverse possession – Maxims – Animus possidendi. Directing the matters to be placed for consideration on merits before the appropriate Bench, the Court.