VALLIYODAN KRISHNAN Vs. VALLIYODAN NARAYANAN NAIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is unfortunate that a litigation which began as early as in 1988 has to be remanded to the trial court for consideration of certain aspects. The plaintiffs have come up in appeal.

(2.) The suit was one for partition. According to the plaintiffs, there was a partition in their tharawad and the plaint schedule properties were set apart to the thavazhy of which the plaintiffs and the defendants are members. There was no subsequent partition in the thavazhy and therefore, they were enjoying the plaint schedule properties as co-owners. The plaintiffs would say that they felt that defendants 1 and 2 were dealing with the properties as it belonged exclusively to them and that affects their rights. Therefore, they do not wish to continue joint status and hence the suit for partition.

(3.) The first defendant did not counter. In the written statement filed by the second defendant, it was contended that there was an oral partition among the members of the thavazhy and the suit properties were set apart to the share of defendants 1 and 2. The first defendant has released her rights over the suit properties in favour of the second defendant. Pointing out that the plaintiffs have no right to seek partition, he prayed for dismissal of the suit.