VALSALA Vs. SARADA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the plaintiffs 1 and 2 in O. S. No. 130 of 1994 on the file of the Sub Court, Kozhikode. Respondents 1 to 3 are the defendants in that suit. O. S. No. 130 of 1994 is a suit for partition.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiffs is briefly as follows: Plaint A schedule is the genology. Plaint B schedule is the property having an extent of 20 = cents belonging to Edathil Padmanabhan as per Kanam Assignment Deed No. 680 of 1947. The appellants herein are children of deceased Padmanabhan. The first defendant is the second wife of Padmanabhan and defendants 2 and 3 are their children. Padmanabhan died in September 1992. The plaintiffs are entitled to get two shares out of five shares over the plaint B schedule property. Since the defendants refused to give the share, the plaintiffs filed the above suit for partition.

(3.) THE defendants filed written statement denying the claims of the plaintiffs over the entire B schedule property. They contended that an extent of 5 = x 11 (6ft. kole) was already purchased by the first defendant from padmanabhan as per Assignment Deed dated 14. 1. 1958. The first defendant purchased 7. 8 cents from Padmanabhan as per Sale Deed No. 2520 of 1992. Therefore, that portion of properties covered by the above two documents is not available for partition.