Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Maria Marta Vaz and Agnelo Constancio Vaz, challenged two orders: (1) an order dated 15.10.2022 by the Civil Judge Senior Division at Mapusa reopening Inventory Proceedings Case No.154/2007/C/A under Section 446 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding Act, 2012, and (2) an order dated 05.04.2025 by the District Court dismissing an appeal against the trial court's order dated 29.05.2024 which held that the petitioner failed to prove that a Will dated 15.06.2007 of the deceased Blandina Fernandes was void. The Inventory Proceedings concerned the estate of late Victor Sebastiao Fernandes, who died leaving his wife Blandina and four children. The proceedings concluded in 2015 with a partition allotting equal shares to the children. The petitioner, one of the children, later challenged a Will allegedly executed by Blandina. The High Court held that the reopening of Inventory Proceedings without any application or notice was illegal and set aside the order. Regarding the Will, the court found that the trial court dismissed the application without holding any inquiry, which was a procedural error. The High Court set aside both orders and remanded the matter for fresh consideration of the Will validity after proper inquiry.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Inventory Proceedings - Reopening - Section 446 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding Act, 2012 - The Civil Court reopened concluded Inventory Proceedings without any application or notice to parties, purportedly under Section 446, which requires a judicial finding of fraud, forgery, or error. The High Court held that such reopening without proper inquiry and without hearing parties is unsustainable and set aside the order. (Paras 2, 6-8) B) Succession - Will - Validity - Inquiry - The trial court dismissed the petitioner's application to declare a Will a nullity without holding any inquiry, merely stating that the petitioner failed to prove. The High Court held that the court must conduct an inquiry and record findings based on evidence, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. (Paras 2, 9-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Civil Court could reopen concluded Inventory Proceedings under Section 446 of the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceeding Act, 2012 without a proper inquiry, and whether the trial court could dismiss the application challenging a Will without holding an inquiry.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 15.10.2022 reopening inventory proceedings and the order dated 05.04.2025 dismissing the appeal, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration of the will validity after proper inquiry.
Law Points
- Inventory proceedings cannot be reopened without proper inquiry
- Will validity must be determined after evidence
- Section 446 of Goa Succession Act requires judicial determination
- Appellate court must not dismiss appeal without considering merits
