The court ruled that misinterpretation of evidence regarding property ownership and limitation laws needs revision, reinstating the rights of appellants to challenge encroachments.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Shri J. E. Coelho Pereira, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. By order dated 16.07.2010 the above appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law :

1. Whether the Lower Appellate Court has failed to consider the admission under Section 58 of the Evidence Act with regard the date of the construction of compound wall and, consequently, came to an erroneous finding that the suit is barred by limitation ?

2. Whether on account of misconstruction of the Deed of Sale of the year 1908 (11/05/1908), the Court got disoriented relating the direction of the properties ? 3. Whether the First Appellate Court committed illegality is discarding the Communidade plan of the original suit property although the said plan was of Tomba-1 prepared under Article 549 of Code of Communidade ?

3. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants have filed the suit on the ground that they are the co-owners in possession and enjoyment of the property known as 'Temericho Sorvo' situated at Feira Alta, Mapusa Goa, originally described in old registration bearing nos. 31080 and surveyed under Chalta No.61, admeasuring an area of about 250 square metres and another property bearing no. 13203 surveyed under Chalta No.64, admeasuring an area of 304 square metres approximately.

4. It is further their contention that part of the property surveyed under no.61 is described in Book B-80 comprising of two additions, the first addition admeasuring an area of about 174 square metres towards south and second addition admeasuring an area of about 76 square metres lies towards north, totalling an area of about 250 square metres. It is further their case that towards west side of the said property surveyed under No.61 is the property surveyed under No.64 belonging to the appellants and the property surveyed under no.65 belonging to one Laxman Govind Natekar. It is further their case that the property surveyed under No.64 admeasuring an area of 304 square metres and is described in the Land Registration no.13203 and is bounded towards the east by the plot no.61 of the appellants, towards west by national highway, towards north by the property surveyed under no.65 belonging to Laxman Govind Natekar and towards south by the property surveyed under No.60-B registered in the name of Anacio Santos, Armando Rodrigues and others. It is further their case that both the said properties surveyed under Nos. 61 and 64 are still registered in the name of late Shri Vishnu Hari Mochi, the grand father of the appellant no.1. It is further their contention that after resurvey, the properties under chalta nos. 61 and 64 are renumbered as chalta nos. 57 to 64 for which the entries are made in book no.2 and P.T. Sheet no.124. It is further their case that on the eastern side of the property surveyed under No.61, there was a reserved plot of the Communidade of Mapusa bearing No.214 which goes parallel to the north portion of the said property comprising an area of 58 square metres. It is further their contention that the Communidade of Mapusa in the year 1987 made an application to confirm the small strip of land and the same came to be confirmed by order dated 05.01.1998. It is further their case that chalta nos. 57 to 64 were originally surveyed under nos. 61 and 64, which was owned and possessed by the grand father of the appellant no.1, while in resurvey the chalta no.61 has been divided into two parts as per the earlier additions and second addition, admeasuring an area of about 76 square metres which is shown in the survey records under No.52A and that the first addition admeasuring an area of about 174 square m