Bava Kamma 70B

חלפתא, אמר לו:

Ḥalafta, he said to him the following in the course of their discussion of the halakhot of possession.

הרי שאכלה שנה ראשונה בפני שנים, שניה בפני שנים, שלישית בפני שנים, מהו?

If one has been in possession of real estate for 3 years, this serves as proof of his claim that he is the legal owner. One who is able to prove uninterrupted possession for the necessary period is not required to produce documentary evidence of his legal title to the property. R' Yoḥanan ben Nuri or father Ḥalafta asked: If one harvested and ate the produce of a field that he claims as his own the 1st year of the 3 years required for establishing possession of the land in the presence of two witnesses, and subsequently ate the produce of the 2nd year in the presence of two other witnesses, and finally ate the produce of the 3rd year in the presence of yet two other witnesses, what is the halakha? Can the 3 testimonies combine to establish full testimony that he ate the produce of 3 years, thereby confirming his ownership of the field?

אמר לו: הרי זו חזקה. אמר לו: אף אני אומר כן, אלא שרבי עקיבא חולק בדבר. שהיה רבי עקיבא אומר: ״דבר״⁠ – ולא חצי דבר.

R' Ḥalafta said to R' Yoḥanan ben Nuri, or vice versa: This is considered to establish presumptive ownership by the one who ate the produce. The other Sage said to him: I too say that this is so, but R' Akiva disputes this matter, as R' Akiva would say: The Torah requires that witnesses must testify with regard to a complete matter and not part of a matter. Since there must be testimony concerning consumption of the produce over 3 years, and each set of witnesses establishes only that it took place for one year, their separate testimonies do not combine. If so, the Mishnah is apparently not in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva.