JUDGMENT KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.: - Heard. Rule. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The petitioners challenge the order dated 21st December, 2005 passed by the Mamlatdar in Case No. JM-III/MUND/ DECL/01 and 02/2005 under section 8-A of the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkar (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975. By the impugned judgment the learned Mamlatdar has dismissed the application solely on the ground that the respondent before the Mamlatdar had purchased the house in his capacity as mundkar having been registered under section 29 of the said Act and not by a stranger to the property. The learned Mamlatdar has held that if a person who is alien to the property purchases the property as a whole including the mundcarial house then only such a person steps into the shoes of the mundkar. If a person is registered as mundkar under section 29 of the said Act, he does not step into the shoes of the batkar. 3. Few facts relevant for the decision are that the petitioners herein approached the Mamlatdar with the plea that the house which was purchased by the respondents was constructed by their common ancestor and the respondents along with the petitioners are occupying the said house in mundcarial capacity. However respondent No.1 was registered as witness under section 29 of the said Act and taking advantage of the said situation area of the basic principles of natural justice and the cannot be sustained. 5. The impugned order therefore needs to be quashed and the matter remanded to the Mamlatdar to give opportunity to the partiers ties in support of their rival contentions and then proceed to decide the matter on merits. 6. Hence the petitions succeed and the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The matters are remanded to the Mamlatdar to decide the applications under section 8-A filed by the petitioners on merits and under the provisions of the Mundkar Act. Rule is made absolute in above terms with no order his as to costs. Petition allowed.