Trespass Case Study

1019 Words5 Pages
Trespass originated in England in the thirteenth century as a general concept. The main emphasis was on providing civil remedies such as payment of damages or return of possession. In the late fourteenth century, Parliament adopted criminal statutes prohibiting forcible entry on real property. This legislative scheme was further developed in the next two and a half centuries. First half of the eighteenth century a series of English cases explicitly recognized crime of criminal trespass. Increase in cases were because of the existence of civil remedies for the tort of trespass; the availability of the legislation concerning forcible entry and detainer, which provided both a civil remedy and criminal sanctions; and the failure to remedy certain…show more content…
The first limb refers to entry into a property in the possession of another with the intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy the person in possession and the second to remaining in possession having lawfully entered into the property with the intention of intimidate, insult or annoy the person in possession pf such property, or with an intention of committing an offence. Thus, the essence of the offence of criminal trespass lies in an unauthorized entry or and unlawful retention of lawful entry with the intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy the person in possession of such…show more content…
‘Actual’ means to the exclusion of all other people. It need not necessarily be in the possession of the owner, it could be with the tenant as well. Besides, the entry need not be forceful; it is enough if it is without permission. However, the owner needs to be diligent about a peaceful trespasser who is unaware of the title of the true owner since, if the owner does not assert his title within a prescribed period and trespasser is allowed to have peaceful, continuous possession, he acquires an absolute title over the land. The limitation period provided under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for suit for possession of immovable property is twelve years. This was observed by the Supreme Court in Nair Service Society v. K.C. Alexander on the basis of which various propositions with regard to trespasser vis-a-vis a true owner was laid down. Some of the relevant propositions are mentioned below: • Unauthorized entry into another’s land will not have the effect of dispossessing the true owner. Such acts will lead to settled possession only when the true owner having knowledge of it, acquiesces • When the trespasser is not in settled possession, the rightful owner can re-enter and reinstate himself by removing the obstruction or unauthorized construction by using minimum force. Such action by true owner will be considered as defending his

More about Trespass Case Study

Open Document