Deepak Verma JUDGMENT
Dalveer Bhandari, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal emanates from the judgment and order dated
3. Appellant No. 1 and Respondent No. 1, Erasmo Jack de Sequeira (now dead) were sister and brother, hereinafter referred to as Appellant and Respondent respectively.
4. According to the Appellant, she is the sole owner and is in exclusive possession of the suit property. Her title of the said suit property was clearly admitted, and never disputed by the Respondent, Erasmo Jack de Sequeira. According to the Appellant, the suit property was given to her brother as a caretaker. The Respondent has kept Appellant, his own sister, out of her suit property for about two decades by suppressing relevant material and pertinent information from the Court and abusing the process of law.
5. Both the Appellant and the Respondent hail from the State of Goa and belong to one of the leading and well known families of Goa. The father of the Appellant and the Respondent, Dr. Jack D. Sequeira was an affluent businessman and a well-known politician of Goa. Dr. Sequeira, during his lifetime, gave a number of properties worth crores of rupees to the Respondent and also gave some properties to the Appellant and her sisters. The Respondent was given a soft drink factory at Goa, mining leases of iron ore, agricultural lands and residential plots including one situated at Dona Paula, which is located next to the Governor's House. Though the Respondent was given properties worth several crores of rupees, he still eyed on a small property which the Appellant purchased through Court auction after paying full sale consideration. The Respondent-brother of the Appellant was also a very influential and important Member of Parliament. He was also very active in the local politics in Goa.
6. The Appellant urged that the suit property originally belonged to her grandmother. Under the Portuguese Law, her (grandmother's) children, i.e. two sons and a daughter (the Appellant's father, uncle and aunt) got 1/3rd share each in the said suit property. The suit property of her grandmother was put to auction and this suit property in question was purchased in auction by the Appellant. In the Inventory Proceedings No. 1075/935 in the year 1968, she became the exclusive owner of the suit property. Admittedly, the Appellant has placed a certified copy of the order of the Civil Judge, Senior Division at Panaji dated 27th May, 1972 issued in 5.5.2009 passed by the High Court of Bombay, Bench at Goa in Civil Revision Application No. 3 of 2009. favour of the Appellant. According to the Appellant, the possession and title of the suit property in favour of the Appellant is established from the judgment of the Inquiry Officer of City Survey Tiswadi, Panjim, Goa. The said order was not only passed in the presence of the Respondent, but also in the presence of his Attorney, Rodrigues who was also a senior executive officer of the Respondent. The relevant portion of that judgment is as under:
The claim put forth by Shrimati Maria Teresa de Sequeria from Panaji, in respect of Chalta No. 14 of P.T. Sheet 65 was inquired into and it was found that the same belongs to the said Maria Teresa de Sequeria in view of Inventory Proceedings No.........