JUDGEMENT

1.

Heard Appellant No. 1 in person and Mr. Pereira, the learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. Korgaonkar for the Respondents.

2.

Admit.

3.

The present matter is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage with consent of the Appellants who appeared in person and the learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents.

4.

The order dated 22.05.2024 passed by the learned Trial Court in the inventory proceedings is challenged in the present Appeal.

5.

Appellant No. 1 argued the matter in person whereas Appellant No. 2 was personally present with her.

6.

Both the Appellants who are residents of Mumbai claimed that the inventory proceedings were conducted in their absence including the licitation and auction, which according to them is illegal and bad in law. The Appellants, therefore, filed an Application under Section 151 of CPC to recall the order of auction and also to recall/quash the licitation, which was held ex-parte.

7.

It is the contention of Appellant No. 1 that she is the eldest daughter/child of deceased Francis Lobo, upon whose death Inventory Proceedings No. 188/2014 was filed by her brother/ Respondent No. 1. It is further her case that the survey records and more specific