ORDER :- These consolidated appeals and revision application raise sharply the only question whether the suits instituted by the respondents are barred by limitation. They would be disposed of by a common judgment. To reach a conclusion on this question involves the Court in wading through the relevant laws.

2. The material facts may be stated : the respondent - Antonio Vicente de Fonseca - instituted a suit in terms of Article 2390 of the Portuguese Civil Code on 25th November, 1965 - against the appellant Justiniano Augusto da P. Barreto, claiming damages for malicious prosecution launched against him. This Article furnishes cause of action when the accusation or the charge preferred is false and malicious. The respondent was prosecuted for having been a party to the defalcations of money on the part of his clerk. He was a Notary Public at the material time. He was convicted by the lower court but, on appeal, ultimately he was acquitted by the Supreme Court in Lisbon on 6th April, 1960. The suit was resisted by the appellant on several grounds; one of the grounds was that it was barred by limitation under Article 74 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred

Click Here to Read the rest of this document