{"issue_text":"Whether there was spoliation requiring restoration of possession","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Removal of boundary poles, encroachment into plot, peaceful possession"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellants occupied Plot 36 since 2008 under a resettlement scheme. The respondent's mining claim on adjacent Plot 39 encroached 30 meters into the appellants' plot in September 2020, removing boundary poles and a house. The trial court dismissed the spoliation application relying on mining legislation. The appeal court found spoliation proven and reversed the decision.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases