This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 29/07/2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Margao (first Appellate Court) in Regular Civil Appeal no. 15 of 1989.

2. The said Regular Civil Appeal No. 15 of 1989 was filed by the Defendant no. 1 in Regular Civil Suit No. 206/82/D against the Judgment and Decree dated 15/12/1988 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Margao (trial Court) in the said suit.

3. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status in the said Regular Civil Suit No. 206/1982/D.

4. The plaintiff had filed the said suit for declaration that the deed of sale dated 23/1/1982 pertaining to the land bearing Chalta No. 7 of P. T. Sheet no. 2 of City survey of Margao is null and void since the said land belongs to and is in actual possession of the plaintiffs and for direction to the defendant no. 1 to sign and execute a deed of sale in favour of the plaintiffs, upon deposit by the plaintiffs, of the price due and consequent expenses, in respect of Chalta No. 3 of P. T. Sheet no. 2 and to deliver the peaceful possession of the same to the plaintiffs.

5. Case of the plaintiff's, in short, was as follows:

There exists a property known as “DAVONDEM XETAVELEM” or “DAVODEM” at Margao which bears Land Registration No. 43.273 and Land Revenue No. 2388 and is bounded on the East by the property of Francisco Manuel de Miranda and Joao Floriano de Noronha; on the West and South by the lake Bogvoti; and on the North by the property of Bernardo Rebello and Antonio Joao Rodrigues. The said property bears Chalta nos. 2, 3, and 7 of P. T. Sheet no. 2 of city Survey of Margao. The said property comprises of an area of 4989 square metres and the right to half of the property is registered in the Land Registration Office under no. 45.975, in the name of plaintiffs no. 1 and 3, whereas right to the other half originally belonged to Mr. Francisco Xavier Miranda e Noronha, who is now deceased. By virtue of an amicable and oral partition of the property, effected about thirty years ago, the land bearing Chaltas no. 2 and 7 is being held by the plaintiffs, whereas the land under Chatla no. 3 was held by Dr. Francisco Xavier Miranda e Noronha since about 30 years back. The said half of the plaintiffs' property bearing chaltas no. 2 and 7 is without any direct access to the road and is an enclaved property and the access to it lies through the other half constituted by Chalta no. 3. Therefore, the plaintiffs property is dominant heritage in relation to that of Dr. Francisco Xavier Miranda e Noronha which is servient heritage. On 13/08/1972, in the inventory proceedings bearing no. 6/74, the half of the said property which bears chalta no. 3 (suit property) and which was listed under Item no. 20 was allotted to the defendant no. 2, who is son of Dr. Francisco Xavier Miranda e Noronha. Without prior notice to the plaintiffs, the defendant no. 2, by deed dated 23/01/1982, sold his part to the defendant no.1 for a sum of Rs. 7,000/-alongwith Chalta no. 7 which did not belong to him and which belongs to the plaintiffs. The said Sale Deed was presented for registration on the same date. The plaintiffs by way of preemption are entitled to purchase the part of the said property from the defendant no. 2 which has been purchased by the defendant no. 1 and to a declaration that the sale of land bearing Chalta no. 7 is null and void. Hence the suit.

6. The defendants, by way of written statement, alleged as follows: The suit is not maintainable as there is no valid provision of law on which the reliefs as prayed for are based and the same is barred by Law of Limitation. The property purchased by defendant no. 1 from defendant no. 2, by Sale Deed dated 23/01/1982, is distinct and separate property, bearing Chalta no. 3 of P. T. Sheet no. 2 of the City survey, which was in peaceful and continuous possession of the Defendant no. 2 and prior to him by his predecessor in title. T