URSULA RENHA RUMALDINA SOARES Vs. ROSARINHO M.FERNANDES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Nigel Da Costa Frias for the appellants and Mr. Jose Reis for the respondents.

(2.) This appeal is directed against concurrent decrees made in Regular Civil Suit No.222/2015/C and Regular Civil Appeal No.115/2018 directing the appellants - defendants to demolish the illegal enclosing and covering of open terrace admeasuring 48 sq. mtrs. on the second floor of the building and also enclosing the cantilever balcony of the hall. Accordingly, a declaration and a mandatory injunction have been issued to this effect by the two Courts.

(3.) Mr. Costa Frias submits that the suit was barred by limitation because the alleged deviations, if any, were made in 2001 and the suit was instituted only in 2015. He submits that the trial Court wrongly assumed that denials in the written statement were evasive or that the provisions of Ss. 17 and 22 of the Limitation Act applied. He submits that the engineer, who is alleged to have informed the plaintiffs about the illegalities and the deviations only in the year 2014, was also not examined as a witness. He submits that the material on record establishes that the suit was barred by limitation.