C. S. GEETHALAKSHMI Vs. R. SELVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants are the defendants in the Suit in C.S.No.240 of 2019. The respondent is the plaintiff in the Suit. In the above Suit, this Court has passed a preliminary decree for partition on 19/6/2019. The preliminary decree reads as follows:

(2.) After granting of preliminary decree, this Court directed that the parties are at liberty to apply for final decree. Subsequently, the applicants herein had filed A.No.6322 of 2019 to pass final decree for partition of the Suit Schedule 'A' property by metes and bounds. Along with the said application, another application in A.No.6321 of 2019 was filed by the applicants for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to inspect the Suit Schedule 'A' Property and divide the same by metes and bounds into four shares and allot the shares to the applicants/defendants 1 to 3 and the plaintiff.

(3.) In response to the application filed by the applicants, this Court has appointed an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the Schedule 'A' property and file his report, vide order dtd. 6/11/2019. The Advocate Commissioner, after giving notice to the parties, inspected the property on 16/11/2019 and filed his report dtd. 20/11/2019 before this Court. The plaintiff, being not satisfied with the report of the Advocate Commissioner, has filed her objections dtd. 20/11/2019. The objection of the plaintiff was that the Advocate Commissioner's report sated that the Suit Property cannot be equally divided due to the nature of physical features and it was impossible to fairly divide the Suit Property into four equal shares, by equal value by metes and bounds. The Advocate Commissioner concluded that the sale of the property and distribution of the sale proceeds equally would be more beneficial for all the shareholders.