SHEELA RODRIGUES Vs. LOURENCINHA ANA DCRUZ RODRIGUES FERNANDES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE point which arises for consideration in this revision application is whether the appeal against an order in inventory proceedings wherein the valuation of the assets disclosed by the applicant "inventariante" exceeded Rs. 25,000/- prior to 18th August 1998 and exceeds Rs. 1,00,000/- since 18th August, 1998 would lie to the High Court or to the District Court.

(2.) THE lower appellate Court by the impugned order dated 11-8-98 passed in Misc. Civil Application No. 28/98 placing reliance on the judgment of the single Judge in the matter of Zacarias Duarte Domingos Pereira v. Camilo Inacio Evaristo Pereira, AIR 1984 Bombay 295 and referring to the Section 22 of the Goa, Daman and Diu Civil Courts Act 1965 (hereinafter called as "civil Courts Act") has held that the appeal against order dated 23-3-98 of the trial Court in the instant case, irrespective of being valued at Rs. 30,000/- by the petitioner, i. e. inventariante in inventory proceedings No. 15/1993, was maintainable before the District Court.

(3.) IT is the contention of Shri M. B. DCosta, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner that the inventory proceedings are "suits" in broad sense and the decision of the learned single Judge in the matter of Zacarias Pereira (AIR 1984 Bom 295) (supra) was not in relation to the provisions contained in Section 22 of the Civil Courts Act but it was only in relation to the procedure to be adopted for the purpose of the inventory proceedings. The point for consideration in the said case was whether the provisions contained in Civil Procedure Code or those prescribed under the Portuguese Civil Code were applicable to the inventory proceedings and therefore the impugned judgment passed in relation to the Section 22 of Civil Courts Act but based on the said decision is bad in law and without application of mind as regards the scope and meaning of the expression "suit" under Section 22 of the Civil Courts Act.