Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Maria Fatima Ditosa Josefa Rodrigues ... vs The State Of Goa, Thr. The Chief ... on 20 August, 2024

Author: M. S. Karnik

Bench: M. S. Karnik

                                      905-wp-523-2024.doc

Andreza


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 523 OF 2024

Maria Fatima Ditosa Josefa Rodrigues & anr.                     ...... Petitioners

                          Versus

The State of Goa, Thr. The Chief Secretary & 3 ...... Respondents
Ors.


                            -----------------------------------------

Mr. A. F. Diniz, Senior Advocate with Ms. Fawia Mesquitta,
Advocate for the Petitioners.

Mr. S. P. Munj, Additional Government Advocate for the
Respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

                                ----------------------------

                   CORAM:              M. S. KARNIK &
                                       VALMIKI MENEZES, JJ.

                         DATE :        20th AUGUST 2024


ORAL ORDER (Per M. S. Karnik, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Diniz, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Munj, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

2. On 29.11.2001, the petitioners made an application to the President of Communidade of Quelossim, Quelossim, Goa, for grant of Page 1 of 7 20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 ::: 905-wp-523-2024.doc Posse Difinitiva of Communidade land at Quelossim Goa. The application reads thus:

"Andrew Francisco Rodrigues House No. 651, Alto Chicalim.
Near Police Quaters, P. O. Box No. 60, VASCO DA GAMA GOA 29/11/2001 The President Communidade of Quelossim Quelossim Goa Dear Sir, Sub: Grant of Posse Difinitiva of Communidade land at Quelossim Goa.
I have been granted Aforanmento of Communiade land admeasuring 30,000 square metres situated at Quelossim Goa. Posse Provisional was granted to me under File No. 88/59. I have been paying "FORO" till 1999. A copy of the receipt of foro is submitted herewith for your ready réference and record I applied for Posse Definitiva and the Honorable Administrator Communidades has been pleased to grant my request.
In the circumstances, I request you to grant me Posse Difinitiva at the earliest.
Kindly let me know the date and time as also the amount of money, if any, to be paid by me.
Thanking you, Yours faithfully (Andrew Francisco Rodrigues) CC : The Administrator of Communidades, Margao, Goa."
Page 2 of 7

20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 ::: 905-wp-523-2024.doc

3. Thus, there does not appear to be any dispute that the petitioner was granted Posse provisional and that the petitioner has paid the 'Forro' as required from time to time. The Petitioner had applied for Posse Difinitiva and the application records that the Administrator Communidades has granted such request. Under such circumstances, a request was made by the petitioners on 29.11.2001 for grant of Posse Difinitiva at the earliest. A copy of the application was marked to the Administrator of Communidades, Margao, Goa. Such application for Posse Difinitiva was required to be considered by the Administrator of the Communidades and the Collector, South Goa.

4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that as the application dates back on 29.11.2001, the application may not be available with the Collector, South Goa.

5. The petitioner is in possession of the land in question. There have been some subsequent events pursuant to the filing of the application which needs a mention. The petitioners filed a Regular Civil Suit no. 93/2002/D before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Vasco Page 3 of 7 20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 ::: 905-wp-523-2024.doc Da Gama. The following issues were framed in the suit and the findings thereon are rendered thus :

           Sr.                   Issues                           Findings
           No.

             1    Does Plaintiff prove that he is                 Negative
                  owner    in     possession    of
                  Aforamento of Communidade land
                  admeasuring    30,000     square
                  metres?

             2    Is Plaintiff's suit within limitation?          Negative


             3    What relief? What Order?                  As per Final Order


           Sr.
           No.             Additional Issues                     Findings

             1    Whether the Plaintiff proves that
                  he is in possession of 30,000
                  square metres of portion of Lote
                  No.    85   belonging     to   the
                  Communidade of Quelossim by
                  virtue of public auction dated
                  24.03.1960 and by virtue of N.O.C.              Negative
                  granted in his favour in the year
                  1967?

             2    Whether the Plaintiff proves that

he is entitled for declaration in his favour declaring himself as owner in possession of the property Aforamento of Communidade land admeasuring 30,000 square metres situated at Quelossim, Negative Goa?


             3    Whether the Defendant proves
                  that by Article of "Posse
                  Provisoria"        (Provisional
                  Possession) held on 06.05.1977
                  the Plaintiff was put into                     Affirmative
                  possession of 20,000 square
                  metres and not 30,000 square

                                       Page 4 of 7
                                     20th August 2024




 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024                             ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 :::
                                   905-wp-523-2024.doc


                  metres?

             4    Whether the Defendant proves                 Affirmative
                  that the suit is barred by
                  limitation?

             5    Whether the Defendant proves
                  that the suit is undervalued as              Affirmative
                  such    the    same    is   not
                  maintainable?

             6    What relief ?                           As per final Order

6. The suit came to be dismissed on 30.06.2011 also on the finding that the same was not within limitation.

7. Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners, on instructions, accepts that the petitioner was put in possession of 20000 square metres of land and not 30000 square metres. The question is whether the findings of this suit will come in the way of the Collector while considering the application which was made as far back as in 2001.

8. In this context, we need to look at the provisions of Article 338 of the Code of Communidades. Article 338 of the Code of Communidades, reads thus :

"Article 338 - The provisional delivery of the land granted, as emphyteusis, cannot be considered in legal relations between the communidade and the lease holder, as this is an optional act of mere tolerance, and only the definitive possession confers to the emphyteuta the rights that the civil law recognize and assure him. He, meanwhile, can Page 5 of 7 20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 ::: 905-wp-523-2024.doc make use of the possessory actions and of the other conservatory means against the third parties."

9. A reading of Article 338 indicates that only the definitive possession confers to the emphyteuta the rights that the civil law recognizes and assure him. He, meanwhile, can make use of the possessory actions and of the other conservatory means against the third parties.

10. In the light of Article 338, we find that the civil suit was for declaration of title any way could not be maintained as the application for grant of Posse Definitiva was yet to be decided. There is nothing to indicate that there was a cloud on the petitioners' provisional possession or the Administrator of Communidades having commented adversely as regard the provisional possession. In our opinion, the findings in the civil suit will not come in the way of the petitioners for the purpose of considering the application made for Posse Definitiva in his name.

11. In such view of the matter, the application, which is at page 87 of the paper-book, be considered by the Administrator of Communidades and the Collector, South Goa on its own merits and in accordance with law.

Page 6 of 7

20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 ::: 905-wp-523-2024.doc

12. The application be decided as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from the date when this order is placed on record of the Administrator of Communidades and the Collector, South Goa.

13. Writ Petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs.

VALMIKI MENEZES, J. M. S. KARNIK, J.

Page 7 of 7

20th August 2024 ::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 22/08/2024 07:55:20 :::