Erroneous Views with Regard to Portuguese Laws.

Erroneous views of any law, however widely held and actedupon and even when endorsed by decisions of the Senior Courts,including that of the Supreme Court of India, are no answersto the enforcement of the law when errors are discovered and clearly ascertained. An error when discovered has to be corrected, lest the error destroys the law. Justice is delayed or denied precisely because of these errors. Trial Courts cannot correct these errors because of prevailing wrong decisions of Senior Courts. Do not blame the Trial Courts. Blame yourself for placing your case under erroneous views of laws, and under wrong laws, and in wrong Courts.

All Inventory Proceedings in Goa are filed by allAdvocates under the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code. Thisis a deliberate Mistake as to Fact of Law. An Advocate isethically barred to make such a mistake. The Code of Civil Procedure 1908 is in force in Goa with effect from 15th June 1966. From this date all Inventory Proceedings had to be filed as per law in the Code of Civil Procedure1908 only. No Advocate can have reason otherwise.

All Portuguese Laws in Goa have been abrogated totally with effect from 15th June 1966 latest. The only exception is the Code of Communidades. Reasons cannot be stated here. It is not proper even to file Divorce Petitions under Portuguese Family Laws. These are not the Family Laws of Christians. The principles of Christian Faith are given in the Gospels of Jesus Christ. Follow these principles for Christian Family Laws. 'Gaunkari' was introduced in Goa by Chanakya, and not the Portuguese. No Goan is of Iberian origin. We are all of Indian origin to remember that thePortuguese was only an invader. It is healthy to erase the Portuguese legacy for good.

Inventory Proceedings according to the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code are not suits, and they are distinct and separate proceedings from a suit as understood in the Code of Civil Procedure 1908; and there is no Decree passed.Without a Decree no right is acquired, therefore the said proceedings do not convey any right and are infructuous. To acquire right, proceedings have to be filed strictly under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. Mistakes committed for the last fifty years do not give any reason for any Advocateto misguide his client. Litigants must take caution that the error of fifty years deliberately committed by the Advocates is now known to Senior Courts like the High Courtand the Supreme Court, and Litigants will suffer unless these Inventory Proceedings are filed under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.

Inventory Proceedings filed under the Code of CivilProcedure 1908 is a Civil Suit. The Plaint has to be supported by an Affidavit Any one heir can file the suit as Plaintiff/Inventariante against the other heirs as Defendants/Inventariados. Unless the Parties are at dispute on the Appointment of the Cabeca de Casal, the suit may be decided under Order XV Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure1908 to appoint the Cabeca de Casal by Order. The Order to appoint the Cabeca de Casal is a Decree to vest into theDecree Holder the title as Holder of the Estate of the deceased salvo jure cujuslibet (saving or reserving the right of all others) to include the interest of all the heirs. The Decree is to be executed by Partition according to the shares decided in the Statement of the Cabeca de Casal. The Statement of the Cabeca de Casal is also supported by Affidavit, and has to indicate the description of the estate, the shares of the heirs and other information with regard to the rights of the deceased estate holders. There is Appeal in case the Order of the Trial Court is not fair. The Cabeca de Casal holding the Decree can even settle the shares of the other heirs out of court by appropriate Deed of Conveyance.

a Writ Petition in the Panjim Bench (Goa) of the Bombay High Court admitted as Writ Petition No. 762/2011, to file Inventory Proceedings by making Application under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. I was heard by the Hon'ble High Court and was allowed to do so. I followed the Order of the Hon'ble High Court and filed myApplication in two Cases. Readers should request their Advocates to correct their mistakes of the past fifty years and observe the law for quick justice.