Collection of judgments on boundary disputes between adjacent real estates in Vietnam

Hi, for the content you requested, the Lawnet would like to send you the following judgments:

1. Judgment on boundary dispute between adjacent real estate No. 140/2021/DSPT

- Level of trial: Appellate

- Judicial body: Can Tho City People's Court

- Quoted in  the content: "In 1987, the plaintiff received a land use right transfer from Mr. Pham Van B, the plaintiff was granted a certificate of land use rights by the People's Committee of Can Tho province on July 10, 1997, for an area of 416 m2. When measuring the plaintiff's land area reduced to 362.2m2. The plaintiff discovered that defendants Mr. Le Dinh T and Ms. Ly Thi Y encroached on the plaintiff's land with an area of ​​53.8m2. Now, the plaintiff requests that the defendant return to him the land with an area of ​​53.8m2 located in District B, Can Tho city. And initiate an additional lawsuit asking the defendant to pay the land area of 9.5m2. This land is located outside of the plaintiff's land, which is currently being used by the defendant. Plaintiff asked the Court to recognize the 9.5m2 of land as hers. In 2009, the defendant received the transfer of land use rights from Mr. Nguyen Van T with an area of 2,199.3m2, and he used the right area. The plaintiff used the area increased to 161m2, the location of the land that the plaintiff used was granted in the wrong position, the actual used land plot was the wrong shape compared to the land area according to the certificate. In 1997, there was no boundary line, but the plaintiff was granted a land use right certificate on July 10, 1997, which is inconsistent with the plaintiff's land use history from 1997 to present. The defendant did not encroach on the land, so he did not agree to return the land to the plaintiff."

2. Judgment on boundary dispute between adjacent real estate No. 66/2021/DS-PT

- Level of trial: Appellate

- Judicial body: Can Tho City People's Court

- Quoted in  the content: "The father of the plaintiffs is Mr. Pham Thanh P4, representing the household in the name of the certificate of land use right on January 22, 1999, plot 154, area 1,560 m2, located in hamlet Q, commune T, district V, Can Tho city. Adjacent to plot 154 is plot 157, area 2,759m2 owned by Mr. Nguyen Tan P1 and Ms. Huynh Thi T2 (deceased) in the name of the paper, but the direct users are Mr. Huynh T and Ms. Nguyen Thi My H.The process of using Mr. T and Mrs. H encroached on plot 154, so the plaintiffs sued to ask the defendant to return the encroached area of 137 m2. However, after actual measurement, only the encroachment area of 48 m2 was required to be paid, with the request for the area of 89 m2 being withdrawn. Since land plot 157 of Mr. P1's household is owned by Mrs. T2 on the paper, the plaintiffs requested defendants Mr. T, Ms. H, and persons with related interests and obligations Mr. P1, Ms. Nguyen Thi Lan H3, Ms. Nguyen Mong S, Ms. Nguyen Thi Hong P2, Ms. Nguyen Thi Lan A1, and Ms. Nguyen Le P3 to jointly take responsibility for returning the encroached land. She and her husband, Mr. T are managing and using land parcel 157, with an area of 2,795 m2, according to the certificate dated 12/10/2007, in the names of Mr. Nguyen Tan P1 and Mrs. Huynh Thi T2 (deceased). The boundary between the two land plots used to have a ditch, but now it has been filled in and is no longer the same as before. The defendants are husband and wife, Mrs. Nguyen Thi My H managed and used the land for more than 30 years; and only used it in the area of plot 157 according to the issued land certificate, not encroaching on parcel 154 of the plaintiffs. The landmark boundary between the two land plots has been determined to be stable, so the plaintiff's claim is not accepted. According to her, this dispute had previously been resolved by the District Court of T, Can Tho Province, by a decision on suspension No. 343/QD.ĐC.DS dated June 20, 2001, which had taken effect, so the Court is requested to suspend the settlement of the case."

3. Judgment on boundary dispute between adjacent real estate No. 171/2021/DS-PT

- Level of trial: Appellate

- Judicial body: Can Tho City People's Court

- Quoted in  the content: "The plaintiff is the owner of land plot 1188, with an area of 280 m2, located in hamlet L, commune T, district V, Can Tho city, according to the land use right certificate dated September 5, 2008. Adjacent to the plaintiff's land is the defendant's land, which is used by Ms. Le Thi Kim C and Ms. Le Thi Tuyet Ng. When the defendant built a house, he encroached on the plaintiff's land about 12m wide and 10m long. Therefore, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit requesting the defendants to return the encroached land area according to the measurements: Mrs. C's part of 13.5 m2; Ms. Ng part of 13.5 m2. On the defendant's side, Mrs. Tran Thi K (died in 2012) is the mother of the women, the owner of land plot 725, with an area of 173 m2 according to the land use rights certificate dated October 8, 1993. Ms. Ng and Mrs. Ng have lived on this land with their mother since before 1975, and after their mother's death, they have continued to use the land until now. The defendant was determined not to encroach on the plaintiff's land, the house she was living in existed when her mother was still alive. Later, she and Ms. Ng rebuilt it, but she did not remember what year it was. In 2015, the State recovered an area of 10.7 m2 to widen National Highway 80 and recorded changes in adjustment. Through the plaintiff's petition, she disagreed, because she did not encroach on the plaintiff's land.

4. Judgment on boundary dispute between adjoining real estate No. 122/2022/DS-PT

- Level of trial: Appellate

- Judicial body: Can Tho City People's Court

- Quoted in  the content: "Mr. N, the owner of land plot No. 497, with an area of 700 m2, located in District R, Can Tho city, has been granted a land use right certificate on March 1, 1992, by the People's Committee of District R. The origin of this land plot was in the name of his grandmother, Mrs. Tiet Thi Q, in the name of the use right. He inherited on February 2, 1999, and his land plot is adjacent to the land plot number 498, owned by Mrs. Tiet Thi H1. In the process of using the land, Mrs. H1's side encroached on the entire canal with her household, so a dispute arose. He repeatedly asked Ms. H1 to return the disputed land, but Mrs. H1 did not agree. Now he is suing to ask Ms. H1 to return the actual measured area of 203 m2 of ditch to his household to manage and use. Ms. H1 is the legal owner of the land plot number 498, district R, Can Tho city. The origin of this land parcel is Mr. Tiet Van P, who bequeathed it to Mr. Tiet Van K (her father). After Mr. K died, he let her cultivate and use it from 1975 until now. She was granted land use rights by the People's Committee of District R on August 9, 1996. For the disputed land that Mr. N disputes, the actual measured area of 203 m2 is part of land plot No. 498. This part of land is the land for growing nipa leaves, she has directly collected the yield so far, and in front of the border with Mr. N, where the two sides have fixed boundaries so far, she has built a fence to use, Only the rear part of the land plot has no pillars. Ms. H1 believes that the disputed land belongs to her lawful use rights, so she does not agree with the petition of plaintiff Mr. N.

5. Judgment on boundary dispute between adjacent real estate No. 234/2022/DS-PT

- Level of trial: Appellate

- Judicial body: Can Tho City People's Court

- Quoted in  the content: "Ms. Nguyen Thi Ch was granted a certificate of land use rights by the People's Committee of Th N district on April 22, 2013 in land plot No. 268, area of 335 m2, land type: 300 m2 and 35m2 perennials, the land is located in Tan L ward, Thot Not district, Can Tho city. The origin of the land was given by Mrs. Ch to her husband, Mr. Nguyen Van P in 2013. The process of using land adjacent to the plaintiff's land plot No. 268 is the use of land parcel No. 267 of the defendant, Ms. Tran Thi H. Between the two land plots, formerly there was a line of cotton hibiscus and a row of cotton trees, but later the row of cotton bud and dead cotton trees no longer existed. In 2006, when Ms. H carried out the procedures for granting a certificate of land use rights, Mr. Nguyen Van P showed the land boundary between the parties for Ms. H to make land papers. At that time, the sides had stone pillars together, including 01 stone pillar on each side and 01 stone pillar behind. After that, her family built a fence in front and pumped sand to make a cement walkway between the 2 land plots. At that time, Mrs. H's family knew but did not have any complaints or disputes. Then, around 2017, Mrs. H's family voluntarily planted more stone pillars, encroaching on the land of Mrs. Ch's family. Ms. Ch asked Ms. H to return the land to the status quo under the previous boundary, but Ms. H did not agree, so a dispute arose between the parties. The matter was resolved by the local government but failed. Now, the plaintiff asks the defendant, Ms. Tran Thi H, to be responsible for returning the encroached land area with an area of 12.2 m2 in the land plot No. 268 used by Ms. Nguyen Thi Ch in the name of the owner. Currently, the part of the disputed land with the current status of a cement walkway is managed and used by Ms. Ch's family, while the section from the cement walkway to the front of the road is managed and used by Mrs. H's family. .

Please Login to be able to download