SUNIL ALPHONES Vs. JANOVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed by judgment debtor Nos.3 and 4 in E.P.No.35 of 2010 in O.S.No.223 of 2004 of the court of learned Munsiff, Vaikom. Respondent No.1/plaintiff is executing a final decree for partition. Grievance of petitioners is that Advocate Commissioner has without the assistance of a Surveyor attempted to effect delivery of property as per Ext.P1, plan and if that is done their access to that part of building allotted to them will be cut off. I have heard learned counsel on both sides.

(2.) As per the final decree in the case plot ABCDGHA is allotted to respondent No.1 while plot GDEFG is allotted to the petitioners. The dividing line between the properties is GD line in the plan. As per the final decree, portion on the south of GD line should go to the petitioners while the portion falling on the north of GD line goes to respondent No.1. Apprehension of petitioners is that if delivery is not effected in the presence of the Surveyor who prepared Ext.P1, plan, right of access to that part of the building allotted to the petitioners will be cut off.

(3.) What is required is to direct that while delivery is effected as per the final decree as aforesaid the Surveyor who prepared Ext.P1, plan also shall be present and the respective plots with that portion of the building falling therein shall be allotted to the parties as per the final decree. Resultantly this Writ Petition is disposed of directing that delivery of property shall be effected in the presence of the Surveyor who prepared Ext.P1, plan and that plot ABCDGHA together with that portion of the building coming within that shall be delivered to respondent No.1 while plot GDEFG together with that portion of the building coming within that plot shall be delivered to petitioners.