Masroor Ahmad Khan ….Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Uttarakhand & Ors. ….Respondent(s)

Illegal possession is liable to be evicted along with damages – claimed to purchase in public auction – Section 35 of the Municipalities Act praying therein   for   a   direction   to   the   Nagar   Palika   for execution of the sale deed in his favour in relation to quarter No.6. – commissioner allowed his application and direct to execute a registered sale deed and also fixed rate of sale – writ to High court – High court dismissed the same – Apex court held that the possession of the appellant since   inception,   i.e.,  since   June  1990  in   quarter No.6   was   unauthorized   and   was   that   of   a trespasser.- there was no allotment letter issued by Nagar   Palika   in   relation   to   quarter   No.6 – failed to file any such allotment letter nor could file any acceptance letter of Nagar Palika indicating acceptance of his so­called highest bid –  failed to show as to how much amount he actually paid to the Nagar Palika towards the sale/auction price for quarter No. 6 – there was no privity of contract between the appellant and the Nagar Palika which could justify appellant’s entry in quarter   No.   6   as   being   legal –   in   the absence   of   any   document   of   title   or/and   legal document   executed   by   the   Nagar   Palika   in appellant’s favour in relation to quarter No.6 before the   appellant   entering   in   quarter   No.6   in   June 1990,   the appellant’s possession cannot be held legal. – the   possession   of   any   person   in   any immovable property is legal, it is necessary for such person to prove  prima facie  that he is either the owner of such property or is in possession as a lawful tenant or is in its permissive possession with the express consent of its true owner.- These   documents   are   not   the documents   of   title,   nor  do  they   prove   appellants legal possession over quarter No.6 and nor do these documents in any way bind the Nagar Palika – damages were also ascertained from the concerned advocates and fixed at 3,000/- per month instead of remanding – ordert to evict the quarter with in 3 months and order to pay damages from1990 to till the eviction – failing which directed to approach the apex court for legal remedies.