History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.228.10

v4.c63.228.10

The third view is that of the Mit. (followed by the Vyavahāramayūkha, Mitramiśra and several others) which⁴⁶³ explains that the loss is not that of the ownership of the thing itself but of the produce of it (there is only '*phalahāni*') i. e. if without protest the owner allows a stranger to remain in possession before his very eyes for twenty years and then he brings a suit, he may succeed in getting back his land but he would lose his claim to the profits of the land. The Mit., the Vyavahāramātṛkā and V. P. (pp. 157-165) contain very elaborate discussions on Yāj. II. 24; but considerations of space forbid any further reference to them. The V. M.⁴⁶⁴ connects Yāj. II. 24 with the preceding verse (viz. that in mortgages, gifts and sales a prior transaction prevails over a later one) and remarks that this verse (Yāj. II. 24) says that if a person after a gift, sale, or mortgage to him allows the property to remain with the seller, donor or mortgagor, who subsequently transfers it to another with possession and the latter holds it for twenty years, then the first dealing though prior is of no avail (as it is not accompanied with possession for 20 years).