VIRENDRA NATH THR. P.A.HOLDER R.R.GUPTA vs MOHD. JAMIL

The Supreme Court held that under Section 9A of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, the claim of adverse possession must be substantiated by evidence of exclusive and continuous possession. The Court found that Jan Mohammad's claim was flawed as he was recorded as a mortgagee in the revenue records, which negated his assertion of adverse possession. The Court restored the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, thereby rejecting Jan Mohammad's claim to be recorded as Sirdar of the land.