FERNANDO PINTO ALIAS FERNANDO Vs. DAYANAND VASSUDEV KUNDAIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for both the parties. Perused the record.

(2.) THE appellants plaintiffs have filed this appeal against the Judgment and Order passed by the Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Mapusa dated 21. 8. 2002, dismissing the suit for damages/compensation.

(3.) THE facts involved in the dispute, in a nutshell, are thus : The plaintiffs are brother and sister of each other and landlords. They are staying in House No. 356 at Quitula, Salvador do Mundo. Conceicao Marta Fernandes has a property which is next to the property and the house of the plaintiffs and the defendant is staying in the property of the said Conceicao. On 23. 12. 1981, the defendant lodged a false complaint to the Mapusa Police saying that the plaintiffs had assaulted him. The defendant also stated in the complaint that while he was removing the leaves, the first plaintiff came and assaulted him and the second plaintiff caughthold of him, as a result of which they were arrested on 24. 12. 1981, but they were released on bail. The chargesheet was filed bearing No. 23/82 dated 15. 2. 1982 and Criminal Case No. 53/82 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, at Mapusa came to be filed. After framing charge for the offence of assault, the plaintiffs finally were acquitted by the order of the Criminal Court dated 28. 4. 1999. The alleged weapon of assault i. e. scythe was attached in the course of investigation. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant was always harassing the plaintiffs and the criminal complaint resulted in acquittal as there was not a single eye witness to the incident and the prosecution failed to prove the case against the plaintiffs. It is the case sought to be made out on behalf of the plaintiffs that the arrest and the prosecution of the plaintiffs was made known to the entire Village of Salvador do Mundo. The first plaintiff was a Sarpanch of the Village and was elected in the years 1967 and 1972 and was also elected in the year 1981 till 1986 and, according to the first plaintiff, he could not contest the election subsequently due to the police complaint filed by the defendant and thereby the first plaintiff's reputation was affected. The first plaintiff was Matriculate in 1941 in Bombay and has worked in gulf, as well as in Bombay; whereas the second plaintiff is Matriculate and was a teacher in St. Philomena High School, Salvador do Mundo till 1954. According to the plaintiffs, they were held in high esteem by the Villagers, but due to the defendant's malicious prosecution their reputation was lowered and they had to spend considerable amount for travelling to Court on various dates and, therefore, were entitled for damages to the extent of Rs. 2,00,000/, besides the amount of Rs. 15,000/4 for Advocate's fees, Rs. 5,000/towards transport, Rs. 1,25,000/towards loss of reputation of the first plaintiff and Rs. 55,000/towards the loss of reputation of the second plaintiff. For all these purposes, a legal notice was issued on 17. 7. 1999 calling upon the defendant to pay Rs. 2,00,000/with interest at the rate of 18 % per annum, but the defendant did not respond and hence, the suit came to be filed.