IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CIVIL APPLICATION (REVIEW) NO. 12 OF 2010 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 27 OF 2007 SHRI. GURUDAS B. VELIP ... Applicant Versus SHRI. GOPAL MALU GAONKAR AND 2 ORS. ... Respondent Mr. R. G. Ramani, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. M. P. Almeida, Advocate for the Respondents. Coram:- F. M. REIS, J. Date:- 16th July, 2010 P.C. This is an application for review of the Judgment dated 26.08.2009, filed by the Appellant on the ground that this Court whilst disposing of Appeal From Order no. 27/2007, failed to consider that the contention of the Applicant was to the effect that the application filed by Respondents before the Inventory Court for recalling the final adjudication of the proceedings was on the ground of fraud which entitles the Respondent to file a suit under the provisions of Article 1427 (2) of the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code. It is further the contention of the Appellant that there is an error apparent on the face on record committed by this Court whilst passing the impugned Judgment dated 26th August, 2009 in view of the non-consideration of the said provisions of Article 1427 (2) of the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code. 2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant has taken me to the impugned Judgment and submitted that the contention of the Applicant was that the application filed by the Respondents before the Inventory Court was not maintainable as the contentions therein were allegation of fraud which entitles the parties to get the matter adjudicated by filing a suit. He further submitted that as such the impugned Judgment deserves to be reviewed by this Court. 3. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent has fairly conceded that the contentions of the learned Counsel for the Applicant that the application was not maintainable in view of Article 1427 (2) of Portuguese Civil Procedure Code, which in fact has not been considered by this Court whilst disposing of the Appeal From Order no. 27/2007. 4. On perusal of the impugned Judgment, I find that in fact this Court has gone on a wrong assumption that the contention of the Applicant was that application was barred under the provisions of 1427 (2) of the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code when, on the contrary, his submission was that the application was not maintainable as there were allegations of fraud which can be adjudicated only in a Civil Suit within the said provisions of Clause (2) of Article 1427. As such, this Court has committed an error apparent on the face on record whilst passing the impugned Judgment. 5. In view of the above, the impugned Judgment dated 26.08.2009, passed in Appeal From Order no. 27/2007, is set aside. The Appeal From Order no. 27/2007 is restored to the file. Place the matter for final hearing on 23.07.2010. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*