MUHAMMEDKUTTY Vs. PATHUMMAKUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE of the defendants in a suit for partition, where there are only three parties, is in appeal against the final decree.

(2.) PURSUANT to the preliminary decree, the plaintiff applied for passing of the final decree. None objected. This is followed by the issuance of a Commission. Following that, Exts.C3 and C4 report and plan were submitted by the Commissioner in view of earlier directions. The court below has recorded that none of the parties taken any oral evidence. There was also no objection filed to the report. This situation is not challenged even before us. In terms of Order XXVI Rule 14 (1) and (2), the procedure to be adopted is that when report is filed by Commissioner, the court, after hearing any objections that the parties may make to the report, shall confirm, vary or set aside it. When the court confirms or varies the report, it shall pass a decree in accordance with the same as confirmed or varied. In the case in hand, report and plan were not objected to. There was no evidence adduced. The Commissioner was not challenged. Obviously the court below is justified in passing the final decree.