06 March 2024 Property Law >> Personal Law  

Owning a piece of land is a dream for many, but property disputes can quickly turn that dream into a nightmare. This is exactly what happened to two neighboring landowners when a city survey unearthed a surprise – a "void area" bordering one of their plots. What began as a minor discrepancy in documented land size has snowballed into a full-blown ownership battle, with both parties staking claim to the newfound space.

Facts:

• Petitioner owns plots 24 and 25A. There's a discrepancy between the actual area and the area mentioned in the property card.
• Respondent No. 6 owns plots 22A, 22B, 22C, and 22D. There's a discrepancy between the area on their 7/12 extract and property card.
• Plot 22D is narrow and has a road on the west side.
• A City Survey Officer reported a void area in Petitioner's plot (25A) and recommended increasing its area by 176.2 sq. mtrs.
• Respondent No. 6 objected, claiming the void area should be included in their plot (22D).
• The Minister-Revenue's order allowed area correction for both parties: Petitioner gets 130.3 sq. mtrs extra and Respondent No. 6 gets an area increase and a boundary change for plot 22D 

Conclusions:

• Petitioner argues they have the sole right to the void area and object to the change in boundaries.
• Respondent No. 6 argues the increased area they received is fair compensation for the discrepancy in their property card.
• There is a disagreement on whether boundaries can be changed and how the void area should be addressed.