IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA SECOND APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2010 SHRI MANUEL AGNELO BARRETTO AND ANR., ... Appellants Versus SMT. MARTHA SANTANO BARRETTO ... Respondent Mr. C. A. Coutinho, Advocate for the Appellants. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE, J. Date:- 25th October, 2010 P.C. Heard Mr. Coutinho, learned Counsel for the Appellants. 2. The appellants by this second appeal challenges the judgment and decree dated 30-11-2009 passed by the Adhoc District Judge-II in Regular Civil Appeal No. 62/2009/FTC-II by which appeal preferred by the respondent against judgment and decree dated 27-04-2009, passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Margao was allowed. 3. The appellants are original plaintiffs in Regular Civil Suit No. 162/2007, filed against the respondent for permanent and mandatory injunction. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant carried out construction in the property bearing survey no. 267/0 belonging to the plaintiff. 4. According to the defendant they have carried out construction in survey no. 267/1 which belongs to them. 5. The trial Court gave a finding that property bearing survey nos. 267/0 and 267/1 was one and the same and accordingly granted permanent and mandatory injunction. 6. The Lower Appellate Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 27-04-2009 and consequently held that plaintiffs had not proved that defendant had carried out any construction in their property. The learned judge further held that plaintiffs were not entitled to the reliefs sought in the plaint. 7. It is pertinent to note that the plaintiff did not plead that properties bearing survey nos. 267/0 and 267/1 were one and the same property. This being the position the judgment of the Lower Appellate Court cannot be faulted. 8. In my opinion, the findings given by the Lower Appellate Court are borne out from the evidence on record. Hence the Second Appeal stands dismissed. A. P. LAVANDE, J. EV