VADIVEL Vs. SAROJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second appeal is filed by the defendants in the suit filed for partition.

(2.) This appeal is filed against the final decree on the ground that the allotment of shares in the property has not been divided equitably and the Commissioner Report accepted by the Courts below is vitiated due to lopsided proposal.

(3.) This Court, at the time of admitting the second appeal, has formulated the following Substantial Questions of Law for consideration: (a)Whether the Courts below are correct in law in passing a final decree on the basis of Exhibits C1 to C7 Commissioner's Report and plan which are clearly lopsided and against the appellants? (b)When the Commissioner has divided the property in such a manner that the valuable portions on the road side have been allotted to the respondent and the interior portions have been earmarked for the appellants, are the Courts below are correct in law in passing final decree on the basis of the said reports and plans which are clearly unfair?