Seebun (Appellant) v Domun and others (Respondents) (Mauritius)
Case ID: JCPC 2014/0078
Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court of Mauritius
Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that:
- the plaint did not disclose a cause of action based on prescription; (b) the action of the appellant was time barred; (c) the failure to join all the heirs of the deceased was fatal to the claim.
- Whether the Court of Appeal failed to consider relevant evidence of actual occupation of the land.
In 1976 Lekha Kawal, the appellant’s late father ("the Deceased") applied to the Conservator of Mortgages for the transcription of an affidavit relating to his ongoing occupation of a plot of land ("the Disputed Land") and his acquisition by prescription of legal title to the Disputed Land. The respondents were the legal owners of the land and resisted that application. The Deceased took no action and died in 1999.
In 2003 the appellant brought an action against the respondents in the Supreme Court of Mauritius. He successfully sought, amongst other things, a declaration from the judge that the heirs of the Deceased were the owners of the Disputed Land.
The respondents appealed to the Court of Civil Appeal, which in 2012 allowed their appeal and set aside the judge’s order.
The appellant was given final leave to appeal as of right to the JCPC. The appeal was filed in 2014 but was struck out in 2017 by the Registrar. The appellant has applied for reinstatement of the appeal.
Krishnawatee Domun and others
Hearing start date
16 May 2019
Hearing finish date
16 May 2019