IPrescription litigation law, generally2Years, immovable property no longer than20Years, but derived for immovable property loans are2Prescription litigation years, therefore, in the case of agent, must make clear the limitation proceedings.

Beijing City Intermediate People's court

Civil judgment

The people with the word no.XNo.

The appellant (the plaintiff)A

Agent

Appellee (defendant in the original instance)C.

Legal representativeYThe director.

Agent Z

Agent Meng Xianqin, Beijing City Huihai Tianhe law firm.

AppellantABecause ofCProtection of property dispute case, the Beijing CityXCivil judgment District People's court, appeal to the court. This court formed a collegiate bench trial of the case, has now been finalized.

AIn the first instance court of claims:8Number of departments that all my property, property room11Between,1983Annual implementation of private saving policy has made the notary. "The hospital and building the Great Cultural Revolution" all by the office of the "Five Seven" production cooperatives, neighborhood committees, health stations and other units occupied use. The "Cultural Revolution" after the implementation of private saving policy, the state explicitly: public accounting for private saving must unconditionally all leases. HoweverCBut under various pretexts refused to implement relevant state policies and regulations, only leases has been notarized11Houses in the north room4Among the rest7Houses, stillCSubordinate3The illegal occupation of units. After my family housing tense times recourse,CBack north room West1And the East Room1Room (i.e.CCertificate of2Among the rest)5Still byCThe "Five Seven" production has changed after the scan show the slide factory and health stations and other units illegal occupation until1997Year1998Years minimum (handled separately). Back this2Room isCThat was issued in units after (1998Years6Month9Day), I did not get the compensation, the compensation of any kind in buildings, theCIllegal use of caused huge pecuniary loss to me, I'm in letters on track to find no fruit. The court granted a requestCIn Xicheng District within the scope of the law to compensate me2Room property, each property of the housing construction area of not less than20Square meter.

CIn the first instance court argued that:AThe husbandXX(1979Annual death) the original property12Among them11Have property right card,1For since the building before the "Cultural Revolution", the family home5Between,6Room for rent,1966Public property,AThe whole family back home,1983Years after the notary, other children give up the right to inherit propertyAInheritance. Implementation of private saving policy returned4Room, other8Removal of pricing between,AIn the1983Years9Month19Japanese neighbor took the settlement amount. At that timeAIn the neighborhood, the numerous committees on the grounds of the housing difficulties,1984Years of Street Office accountALiving difficulties, to the2Houses, but this2With the demolition of houses8House independent.1998YearsAHousing will be the demolition,AMany find neighborhood request certificate, proof1984Years to the neighborhood2Room home.1998YearsASigned an agreement with the demolition unit, acquired4Set of two rooms.AThe8Rooms have pricing compensation, the property is protected and destroy,AThe prosecution requested our compensation property right is wrong, the limitation of action for2Years,AThe prosecution has exceeded the limitation of action, it did not agree withAThe claim.

The first instance court found:AThe husbandXXThe original in Beijing City8No. there is real estate Co11Room, otherwise undocumented housing1Between.XXIn the1979Year of death,1983Years, the Beijing, Xicheng District notary public, his sonE,F,G, theH,I,JAll said the waiver of succession,XXThe11The property from his wife, that the plaintiff inheritance.1984Year of implementation of private saving policy, housing management departments will8North real4The property returned to theARest8(between7A certificate,1Among undocumented) byCOccupy.1998Years6Month,CCertifying, content:AComrades8On the property rights of people, during the cultural revolution, the family was sent home, the real estate byCOccupation, by the "Five Seven" production and use in the neighborhood1979The return of years to implement the policyAThe north room4Because of the housing shortage, and returned to North West Housing Housing1And the East Room1Between.1998Years7Month23Day, Beijing CityMCorporation for municipal road construction,ALiving in the range, the two sides signed relocation agreements, demolition resettlement unit4Set of two rooms, at the same time, the demolition unit toCUseAHouses to theCThe compensation for the demolition, housing can be removed,AWithout compensation.2000YearsATo the court, requirementCCompensation for the use of freeABecause of the housing demolition of housing and its losses totaling100Million yuan, mediation by the court,CThe one-time compensationARMB63Million yuan. After it has been executed. Lawsuit,ACall requestCCompensation2The property is real, becauseCThe return of the2House demolitionCTo compensate, andAHas not been arranged, the otherACall on2000Years has been looking forCThis reflects the way2Housing problem, butCDenied,AAlso does not have to provide the corresponding evidence to prove.

The above facts, a presentation by both parties,1Proof, relocation agreement, civil mediation book as evidence of documented evidence.

The court of first instance judgment: implementation of private saving policy only returned to the housing management departmentAThe north room4Due to historical reasons, other housing byCAfter useCReturnAHouse2Between,ASaid when the demolition of return2House is not settled, butCThere is no fault,CNor is the demolition unit, thereforeARequirementCCompensation for the2The property of real, the lack of factual and legal basis, and1998Years7MonthAAlready signed the demolition resettlement agreements and removal units, at that timeAHe knows or should know the return of housing2Not placed the facts, but thenANot toCRights advocate,ASaid from the2000Years has been the way to theCReflect the problem, but does not provide evidence to prove that, nowAThe prosecution has exceeded the limitation of action, lost to request the people's court to protect their rights and interests. On the basis of the people's Republic of China, "general principles of civil law" article fifth, article 135th, the provisions of article 137th, the decision: to reject theAThe claim.

ANot the first instance court decision, holding the appeal to the court of appeal and the reasons. Think the court of first instance trial procedure for serious violations of law. The first two sessions are not the original evidence appellee submitted for examination, the first instance judgment invalid. The facts that there are several major defects, decision interpret out of context to refer to the content of civil mediation document, rather than a complete reference, omission of the core content of.CAgreed to the original.

The school by the court found the facts ascertained and the court of First Instance judgement of facts, the court for confirmation.

This house believes that: according to the law, citizens to petition the people's court to protect the civil rights, the limitation of action shall not exceed the prescribed by law. Parties to submit their ideas, have the responsibility to provide evidence. There is no evidence or the evidence is not sufficient to prove the claim, by the proof should bear the adverse consequences. According to the facts of the case, the private saving policies when the housing sector returnedAThe north room4Room, afterCReturned to theA2Houses, nowACalled the2House demolition has not been arranged, butCNot the demolition unit, soARequirementCCompensation for the2The property of real litigation request, no legal basis, the court shall not support. Moreover,1998Years7MonthAHave signed a relocation agreement with the demolition unit, at that timeAYou know the2Houses are not installed, nowAThe prosecution has exceeded the limitation of the law. Accordingly, the court of First Instance judgement of the correct, legal proceedings, the court shall be maintained.AAppeal the lack of sufficient evidence, effective, can not be established, the court shall not support. In accordance with the "PRC Civil Procedure Law" article 153rd (a) the provisions of item, the decision as follows:

Dismiss the appeal, upheld the.

The first instance court costs seventy yuan, byABurden (has to pay thirty-five yuan, to pay the balance within seven days after the effective date of this judgment).

The second case acceptance fee of $seventy, byABurden (paid).

This judgment is the final judgment.