As per Section 25 of the Limitation Act, 1963, when shall Right to access and use of light or air, as an easement be absolute and indefeasible?
This question relates to the acquisition of easements, specifically the rights to access and use light or air, under the Limitation Act, 1963. An easement is a right that benefits a property owner (the dominant owner) by imposing a corresponding restriction on another property owner (the servient owner).
The Limitation Act, 1963, particularly Section 25, outlines how long-term use can lead to legally recognized rights, known as easements acquired by prescription. This means that if someone has been using a certain right over their neighbor's property for a continuous period, and under specific conditions, that right can become legally permanent and undeniable.
Section 25 of the Limitation Act, 1963, specifies the conditions under which rights like the use of light or air can become absolute and indefeasible. For these specific rights, the law requires:
The core of Section 25, concerning easements like light and air, focuses on the duration of uninterrupted enjoyment. Let's look at the requirements:
This 20-year period is crucial. It signifies that after two decades of consistent, unchallenged use, the right is legally established and cannot be easily revoked.
Based on Section 25 of the Limitation Act, 1963:
Therefore, the right to access and use of light or air becomes absolute and indefeasible only when it has been enjoyed without interruption for 20 years, as stipulated by Section 25 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
As per Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, ________ shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title.
As per the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, the age difference required between an adoptive parent and an adoptive child of the opposite sex is:
As per Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties, but it is not conclusive in which of the following cases?
Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which Section empowers the Court to grant interim measures of protection?
Which case laid down that a foreign judgment obtained without observing principles of natural justice is not conclusive in India?