ISMAIL ADAM KHAN Vs. GAJANAN BHIKU VELINGKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. S. Lotlikar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1(a) to 1(e) and 4 and 5.

(2.) The above appeal came to be admitted by an order dtd. 14/6/2007 on the following substantial questions of law :

(3.) Mr. P. S. Lotlikar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has pointed out that the subject matter of the property is a portion of the property surveyed under No.44/5-A of Velus Village of Valpoi Goa which according to the appellants is in possession of the appellants in view of a lease created by the relative in favour of the appellants. The learned counsel further pointed out that the said property was surveyed in the name of Arjun Gawas who had no connection with such property and as such, the appellant obtained an affidavit of such person to delete his name from the survey records and record the name of the appellant. The learned counsel further pointed out that based on such correction, the property was partitioned under the Land Revenue Code whereby a separate survey number came to be issued to such property as survey no.44/5-A. The learned counsel further submitted that both the Courts below have come to the conclusion that the respondents have failed to establish their title to the subject property and as such the question of granting any relief of injunction and declaration of possession would not at all arise. The learned counsel further pointed out that except for an area of 3805 square metres of the property, the respondents have no right at all to any other area beyond such area and as such the Courts below have failed to consider that as the respondents have failed to establish that the possession is referable to a legal title, the respondents were not entitled for such relief. The learned counsel further pointed out that the documents produced by the appellants have been discarded on untenable consideration. It is further pointed out that the learned Judge has also granted the relief of rectification of survey records which is not permissible in view of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. It is further submitted that as the respondents have failed to show their title over the subject property, the question of granting any permanent injunction would not arise and as such the substantial questions of law framed by this Court be answered in favour of the appellants.