PRAKASH RAMA NAIK Vs. ASHOK SHIVA NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal questions the legality of the concurrent findings of the learned CJJD Ponda in Regular Civil Suit No.99/1997/B and the learned IInd Additional District Judge, Panaji in the appeal ie. Regular Civil Appeal ...2... No.69/2002 preferred from the judgment and decree dt. 29.4.2002 of dismissal passed in the said suit.

(2.) The appellants instituted the said suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondents/ defendants from entering the suit properties popularly known as Khute Mol bearing survey Nos.220/1 and 220/2 of village Savoi Verem, Taluka Ponda, Goa and for direction to the Talathi to delete the name of late Shiva Rama Naik entered as cultivator of Survey No.220/1 in the revenue records. According to the appellants, the defendants/ respondents are nephews sons of late brother of the appellant/ plaintiff No.1 named Shiva and the suit properties were acquired by their common ancestor Rama- the father of the plaintiff No.1 and late Shiva; and Rama had developed, cultivated and enjoyed the suit properties along with other properties during his lifetime; and upon the death of Rama on 24/02/1964, the properties held by their common ancestor Rama were partitioned, and the suit properties along with various other properties came to be allotted to the appellant/ plaintiff No.1 as a result of the said partition. Since then, it is the plaintiffs' case that the plaintiff No.1 has been in continuous possession of the said properties, and upon the marriage of the plaintiff No.1 with the plaintiff No.2, both the appellants continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the said properties and as a result thereto the name of the plaintiff No.1 was recorded in the revenue record at the time of survey of the village Savoi Verem.

(3.) It has also been the case of the plaintiffs that thereafter, the plaintiff No.1 started paying rent of Rs.200/- to the landlord Ganapat Vaidya and did not insist upon rent receipts on account of faith and cordial relations amongst them. The appellants further pleaded that they maintained, developed and irrigated the suit properties, and earned income therefrom over a considerable period of time. However, they further pleaded that late Shiva in collusion with Revenue Officials got his name illegally included as cultivator of paddy in Survey No.220/1 admeasuring 2200 square meters despite the fact that he never cultivated the said land and the area of the said plot utilised for cultivating paddy did not exceed 800 square meters in area; and a proceedings for negative declaration seeking deletion of the name of the plaintiff No.1 from the tenant's column in the revenue records pertaining the suit properties, has been initiated by the respondents/ defendants in collusion with the landlord's brother and the defendants have illegally trespassed in the suit properties and robbed them of the farm produce on 23/09/1997.