:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA FIRST APPEAL NO. 85 OF 2000 Smt Conceicao Andre Carvalhos alias Smt. Conceicao Andre Raposo ( now deceased ) through her legal representatives (a) Smt. Deliciosa Fernandes alias Deliciosa Raposo, (b) Shri Francisco Xavier Fernandes (now deceased ) through his legal representative 1(b) Shri Norbert Fernandes, both residing at 29/8, Haji Hasam Chawl, D'Lima Street, Mazagaon, Mumbai 400 010. ... Appellants V e r s u s 1. Shri Mario Augusto Raposo, 2. Smt. Loudina Raposo, Both residing Cujira Arnacim, H.No.591, St. Cruz, Tiswadi Goa. ... Respondents Mr. M. B. D'Costa, Senior Advocate with Mr. J. A. Lobo, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. S. D. Lotlikar, Senior Advocate with Mr. H. Kankonkar, Advocate for the Respondents. Coram :- A. H. JOSHI, J. Date :- 13 th AUGUST, 2009. :2: JUDGMENT 1. Land Acquisition Officer has passed the award in the name of the respondents, based on respondents' name seen in Revenue records showing the ownership and possession. 2. This is a first appeal by unsuccessful objector who had opposed the payment of entire amount of compensation to the respondents and claimed that the amount be apportioned. 3. Appellants have tried to show the nature of claim and objection raised by the objector before the Land Acquisition Officer, with the aid of observations contained in para no. III and V of said referral order which read as follows :- “III. The advocate Shri Mortu Krishna Naik Kambli representing Smt. Conceicao Andre Carvalho has challenged the said form I & XIV produced by Shri Frank Moraes and has produced the certificate issued by the Land Registrar, Ilhas ( May, 29, 1979 ) stating that the land having area of 2074 square metres known as “predio palmar Horta” is in the name of Shri Inacio Raposo as per inscription dated 11.7.1934 in the records. V. None of the parties have been able to produce any evidence in respect of the title of the said land except the certificate produced by the Advocate Shri Kambli as discussed above. Shri Moraes stated that the certificate is not in the name of Smt. Conceicao Andre Carvalho whereas the Advocate Shri Kambli claimed that his client Smt. Carvalho is daughter-in-law of Shri Inacio Raposo married :3: to Shri Pedro Antonio Raposo, the evidence of which has been produced by furnishing a copy of the marriage certificate...................” ( Quoted from pages 29 and 30 of appeal paper book ) 4. Respondents have filed the claim titled as 'written statement' and claimed entire amount of compensation averring the points namely :- (a) Denial of the right of the objector. (b) Claiming that claimant No.1 is in possession and enjoyment of land and had carried out developments in the land which is acquired. (c) Claimant No.1 and earlier his father were in exclusive enjoyment of the suit property for 60 years thereby rights of all others, if any are extinguished. 5. The objection contained in the item (c) above is suggestive of right as understood in Portuguese Civil Code as “Negative Prescription” akin to bar of remedy under law of limitation. 6. The objector Mrs. Conceicao Andre claimed to be the wife of Pedro Antonio Raposo, the son born from first marriage of original admitted known ancestor late Inacio. She claim that there are other heirs and objector of Inacio along with her. The appeal is pursued by heirs of objector i.e. her sole surviving daughter and her husband. :4: 7. The objectors (present appellants ) have led the evidence of their power of attorney, who too was the general power attorney of deceased Mrs. Conceicao. They have also relied upon various documents namely :- (1) Death certificate of Mrs. Conceicao Raposo - the objector – who claimed to be the wife of Pedro Anton Rapaz dated 16.8.1993 issued by Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay ( Page 68 ) (2) Form I & XIV, showing the name of Mario Augusto Raposo as owner and in possession (Page 69 ) (3) Survey Plan of survey No.4/1 ( Page 70 ) (4) Death certificate of Jeram Rapoz ( father of LR No.1/ and the husband of objector ) ( Page 71 ) (5) Baptism Certificate of Jeronimo Raposo (Page 72 ) (6) Baptism Certificate of Mario Augusto Raposo ( the claimant present respondent ) ( Page 73) (7) Baptism Certificate of Pedro Antonio Raposo ( Page 74 ) (8) Death and Burial Certificate of Inacio Raposo ( Page 75 ) (9) Burial Certificate Jeronimo Rapozo ( Page 76 ) (10) Certificate of Marriage of Pedro Antonio Raposo with Conceicao Andre Carvalho ( Page 77 & 78 ) :5: (11) Certificate of Birth of Conceicao Andre Carvalho ( Page 79 ) (12) Certificate of Death of Peter Anthony Rapoz ( Page 80 ) (13) Certified copy of Birth Certificate of Mario Raposo in Portuguese ) ( Registo De Nascimento) ( Page 81 ) (14) True English Translation of Birth Certificate of Mario Raposo ( Page 82) (15) Copy of Inscription in Portuguese - Description in Portuguese (Livro Das Descricoes Prediaes ) ( Page 83 & 84 ) (16) True English Translation of Description at pages 83 and 84 ( Page 85 ) (17) Register of Transfers in Portuguese (Registo De Transmissoes ) ( Page 86 & 87 ) (18) True English Translation of Register of Transfers ( Page 88 ) (19) Description in Portuguese (Livro Das Descricoes Predials ) ( Page 89 & 90 ) (20) True English Translation of Book of Predial Description (Page 91) (21) Inscription in Portuguese (Registo De Transmissoes) ( Page 92 & 93 ) (22) Inscription in Portuguese (Registo De Transmissoes) ( Page 94 & 95) (23) True English Translation of Register of Transfers ( Page 96 ) :6: 8. Based on this evidence i.e. documents at Sr. Nos.1 to 23 in para 8 foregoing, the appellants have claimed that since in these documents, objector's husband Pedro was described as son of Inacio, these documents prove the paternity of Pedro, and claim that Mrs. Conceicao - the objector was Pedro's wife and the appellants are entitled to share in the compensation. 9. The claimant present respondent examined himself, one more witness Rama Andre son of Pedro Andre, his agricultural labour, aged 64 years, and relied on revenue record demonstrating his long standing possession. 10. Appellants have placed reliance on Article 4 of the Code of Civil Registration of the State of India as prevalent on relevant date. Said Article 4 reads as follows :- “Article 4- The facts mentioned in Article 2 and so also those referred to in Article 3 when they require registration may be proved in future only by the Civil Registration and any other registers made in respect thereof shall be null and have no probative value”. 11. It is not in dispute that direct evidence documentary or otherwise has not been brought on record by objectors. In these premises it is very fervently urged that it is a public knowledge overall, is not good to state of these registers, and has urged that the inference of paternity between Inacio and Pedro be drawn :7: as claimed by objector. 12. The appeal is opposed arguing the following :- (1) The marriage certificate between objector and Pedro may prove of fact of their marriage. (2) This certificate is only between Conceicao and Pedro and does not have any much less conclusive value as to relationship of the parents of Pedro, by marriage. (3) Claimant's possession is jurisdictional fact, and in view of reported judgment namely AIR 1927 Privy Council, 262 in Manche Anege Akue V/s Manche Kojo Ababio IV one who is in alone possession is entitled to compensation. (4) Baptism, birth and death certificates may vouch those facts but not parental relationship or any fact as to marriage between the parents shown/named in these certificates. 13. Analysis of submission reveals that :- (a) No evidentiary value is attached by law to the parents' relationship as described in the certificate with those of spouse, other than the parties to the marriage i.e. the groom and bride, by any mandatory provision of law, or a rule, or even by a common sense. (b) Marriage certificate will prove the fact of marriage but not parentage of the groom and the bride. (c) Other fact referred in marriage registration could be used to corroborate if same are proved by other evidence. (d) As pointed out by respondents, marriage certificate between Pedro's mother and Inacio has not come forward. :8: (e) It is nobody's case that the marriage registers are not available being destroyed, lost etc. It is not the appellant's case that the register of marriage of Inacio with Luizinha Araujo, Pedro's mother does not exist, as torn/destroyed etc. (f) Statement that “ State of Registers is well known” is vague. (g) Moreover, objectors are content with oral evidence of the power of attorney who has no knowledge about antecedents. (h) The documentary evidence relied upon by objectors – appellants is unworthy to prove facts in issue and oral evidence is no evidence at all. (i) From the long list of documents, death certificate at Sr. No.1, certificate of Baptism at Sr. No. 7, and registration of marriage at Sr. No.10 are eventually relied upon to show that Mrs. Conceicao as wife of Pedro and that Pedro is described as the son of Inacio. (j) These documents do not prove that Pedro was legitimate son of Inacio. (k) Rest of the documents do not have evidentiary value whatsoever. (l) Article 4 relied upon by appellants destroys the appellants' arguments than supporting it. (m) Inacio's marriage with Pedro's mother is not proved. 14. In the result, this Court finds that the appellants have failed to prove that the objector was one amongst the heirs of original land owner Inacio. :9: 15. In the circumstances, appeal fails, and is dismissed. Parties are directed to bear costs. A. H. JOSHI, J. at*