PREMA Vs. SAROJINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the final decree in O.S.No.178/2003 on the file of the Subordinate Judge Court (Additional), Palakkad, as confirmed by the First Appellate Court in A.S.No.112/2019.

(2.) The defendants are the appellants herein. The predecessor-in-interest of the respondents filed O.S.No.178/2003 for partition. By a preliminary decree dtd. 19/10/2010, the Sub Court, Palakkad, directed the plaint schedule property to be divided into two by metes and bounds. One share each was directed to be allotted to the plaintiff and the first defendant. While effecting partition by metes and bounds, the Sub Court directed the Advocate Commissioner to consider the respective occupation of the property by the parties. Pursuant to the said preliminary decree, the plaintiffs filed Final Decree Interlocutory Application No.482/2011 in O.S.No.178/2003 for passing of final decree. In the meantime, the original plaintiff expired and the supplemental plaintiffs were impleaded. During the course of the final decree proceedings, it was brought to the notice of the Court that the defendants had filed R.S.A No.525/2018 against the preliminary decree and an interim stay of passing of final decree was passed initially. However, the date of the same was not extended. The appeal was dismissed by this Court on 8/7/2019. In the final decree proceedings, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed for dividing the property by metes and bounds and accordingly, a report (Ext.C1) was filed along with which Ext.C1(a) plan was also produced. The Advocate Commissioner in his report and plan had demarcated 'A' portion of 30.35 cents in favour of the defendants and 'B' portion of 30.35 cents (26.85 cents + 3 50 cents) in favour of the plaintiffs. The defendants did not file any objection to the Advocate Commissioner's report and submitted before the Court that a final decree can be passed based on the report. Accordingly, the Sub Court, Palakkad, passed final decree as per order dtd. 22/3/2019. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants herein preferred A.S.No.112/2019 before the District Court, Palakkad, which also came to be dismissed on 13/3/2024. Consequent to the dismissal of the appeal by the First Appellate Court, it is stated across the bar that the delivery of the property was effected during January 2025 and the plaintiffs has been put in possession of the same.

(3.) Heard Shri. S.Sanal Kumar, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Adv.T.J.Seema and Shri.R.Lakshminarayan, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri. E.Adithyan for respondents.