HARISHCHANDRA NARAYAN GAONKAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, South Goa, Margao, dated 23rd August, 1989 in Civil Suit No. 29 of 1981 filed by the plaintiff/appellant (hereinafter called the appellant) against the defendants/respondents (hereinafter called the respondents) for declaration and permanent injunction whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed the suit with costs.

(2.) THE appellant filed a suit in his capacity as one of the co-owners of the property known as "deuxeta" situated at Sangolda of Sanguem and it was alleged that a piece of land of that property containing forest produce was demarcated by the respondent No. 2, Conservator of Forests, as "plot No. 9 Kasauli Coupe of Sanguem Taluka. " The case of the appellant is that the said piece of land is part and parcel of his property "deuxeta". The said property is registered in the Land Registration Office under No. 5094 and in the Land Revenue Office (Matriz) under Nos. 193, 194, 195, 199, 200, 201 and 202. The suit land was wrongly shown in the cadastral plan prepared during the Portuguese regime as Government land. Neither the appellant nor his predecessor had knowledge of such entry. The appellant is in physical occupation and possession of the said land but sometime before the filing of the suit, Officers of the Forest Department encroached into the property and marked certain trees on its north-eastern portion described as "kasauli Coupe No. 9". An advertisement appeared also in the newspapers putting in auction the said Coupe. The appellant stated that the trees standing on the suit land are worth about Rs. 2 lakhs and in case auction was conducted the price of auction might not correspond to the real value of the trees. He therefore prayed for a declaration that "kasauli Coupe No. 9" was part and parcel of the property "deuxeta" belonging to him and others and for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents from in any manner interfering with the appellant s possession of the said land.

(3.) THE contention of the respondents is that the property "deuxeta" belongs to the appellant but is distinctly and separately surveyed under No. 38 in the cadastral survey done in 1932. Further all the Matriz numbers quoted by the appellant fall within the limits of the said cadastral Survey No. 38. The respondents admitted that the Government invited tenders for the sale of forest produce of "kasauli Coupe No. 9" but their stand was that the Coupe falls in Survey No. 1 of cadastral Survey of 1932. The same is Government land and is clearly demarcated in terms of survey records and other records of Government in the plan No. 16249 of 1949. It was further stated that Government land belonging to the Forest Department had been demarcated with boundary stones in 1902 which boundary stones are still existing. The Government is in continuous possession of the land demarcated as Government land at least from 1902. At the time of the survey of 1932 and"auto de demarcacao" was also drawn and signed by the owners/of the property shown in it.