SAMIRO MASCARENHAS Vs. VALENTE DCOSTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants herein were the plaintiffs in RCS No. 23/85 and their suit came to be dismissed, on the ground that the Court had no jurisdiction, by Order dated 11th July, 1990 of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco-da-Gama. The plaintiffs preferred an appeal to the District Court and the learned Addl. District Judge, by his Judgment and Order dated 30. 6. 97 dismissed the appeal. The plaintiffs have now approached this Court in Second Appeal against the said judgment and order of the learned Addl. District Judge, dated 30. 6. 97.

(2.) AT the time of admission, the appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law as framed by the plaintiffs, namely in para 13-A), B), D), E) and H ). But at the time of arguments, Shri Coelho Pereira, learned senior counsel of the plaintiffs, has fairly conceded that the questions at 13-B, D, E and H are matters which have got to be decided by the trial Court and cannot be decided by this Court in the present appeal. The said substantial question 13-A reads as follows :-

(3.) SOME more facts are required to be stated to dispose of the said substantial question of law raised in the second appeal.