VAMAN GOVIND RAUT Vs. SITARAM NARAYAN RAUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE predecessor -in -title of the respondents herein (the original plaintiff) sued the appellants herein (defendants) for injunction against interference of their possession in the suit plots of land, stated to be bearing Survey Nos. 181/2 and 182/0 of Village Sal, Taluka Bicholim, Goa. The respondents herein (the plaintiffs) have continued the lis. The defendants counter claimed, claiming ownership and prayed for deletion of the plaintiffs' name in the survey records. The plaintiff 's suit came to be decreed by the Civil Judge, Jr. Division, Bicholim on 9th August, 2000. The defendants' counter -claim was dismissed.

(2.) THE defendants appealed. The appeal has been dismissed on 27th March, 2003. The defendants have filed this second appeal against the concurrent findings of fact of the plaintiffs' title in the suit property.

(3.) THE title of an immovable property has to be proved by documentary evidence, being documents of title and other documents, corroborating the title. The title of a property cannot be proved by merely oral evidence. The documents of title require to show the specific description of the property, to which the title is claimed. The description would essentially be by boundaries and area of the land to which the title is claimed. It may also be by circumstantial evidence of possession or occupation, but which evidence itself does not constitute a document of title. The parties have examined various witnesses about the ownership of various properties, as also the ownership of the properties adjoining the suit property. Aside from the aspect about actual possession, such part of the evidence cannot prove the title to any immovable property. Since the parties have relied upon various documents also, they must primarily show their respective title there -under, the survey records among them showing only their possession.