PEDRO ANTHONY LOPES Vs. NAZARETH F LOPES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Rohit Bras De Sa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Nigel Da Costa Frias, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE above petition challenges an order passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Division, Panaji, in Regular Civil Suit No. 11/2007 dated 03.08.2013 whereby an application filed by the respondents for appointment of Commissioner came to be allowed.

(3.) MR . Rohit Bras De Sa, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the appointment of the Commissioner would amount of calling for evidence at the instance of the Court. The learned counsel further pointed out that it is the contention of the respondents that the petitioners have encroached into the property purchased by the respondents pursuant to the three sale deeds dated 21.05.1984, 30.07.1984 and 08.06.1987 by which the respondents have purchased three contiguous plots of the property surveyed under No.11/5 of the Village Batim. The learned counsel further pointed out that according to the petitioners there is no encroachment as the land where the respondents alleged that there is an encroachment is part and parcel of the property which has been purchased by the petitioners pursuant to the sale deed dated 28.01.2004 forming part of the same survey number.