History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.228.5

v4.c63.228.5

to the Mit., that (1) when possession was comparatively of short duration and not supported by any title much weight was not attached to possession and title by itself would prevail against it, that (2) continuous possession for three generations (though there is nothing to show there was title to begin with) will prevail over a mere documentary title and that (3) a prior title with less than the 'possession for three generations (but with some possession) succeeds over a later title accompanied by possession. Long possession was assumed to have originated in legal title, although owing to lapse of time it was not possible to prove the origin.⁴⁵⁵ The main controversy has raged round the question of what is long possession. Yāj. II. 24 literally translated means 'loss of land results in twenty years when it is enjoyed by a stranger before the owner's very eyes and without any protest from him and loss of chattels (results under similar circumstances) in ten years'. Manu VIII. 147–148 and Nārada IV. 79–80 have two verses in common which mean 'If the owner of anything silently looks on (i. e. raises no protest) when it is being enjoyed in his presence for ten years by strangers he does not deserve to recover it (i.e. he loses the thing). When the owner is not an idiot nor a minor and his property is enjoyed within his sight then the property being lost by his conduct (*vyavahāra*) comes to belong to the enjoyer'. Gaut. XII. 34 has almost⁴⁵⁶ the same words as Manu VIII. 148.