MARA NAICKER (DIED) Vs. SUBBYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants are the appellants before this Court. The suit was filed for partition and injunction restraining the defendants 5 and 6 from providing the electricity service to the defendants 1 to 4 in the bore well put up by them in the suit property.

(2.) The facts of the case leading to the appeal is that the suit property was settled in favour of the plaintiff through the settlement deed dated 15.07.1968 by Maranaicker. After life time of her mother, the plaintiff is entitled to 1/8th share, the 1st and 3rd defendants are entitled for 2/8th share , the 2nd defendant is entitled for 3/8th share and the 4th defendant is entitled for 2/8th share. The suit property was in joint possession by the defendants and the plaintiff without any partition by metes and bounds.

(3.) The request of the plaintiff to effect partition was not conceded by the defendants 1 to 4, whileso, the defendants 1 to 4 a put up a bore well in the suit property, removed the standing trees and also trying to get electricity service connection without the consent of the plaintiff. She being the co-owner, the defendants 5 and 6 cannot provide electricity service to the suit well without her consent. Therefore, the present suit for partition by metes and bounds and allot of 2/8th share to the plaintiff and injunction restraining the defendants 5 and 6 from providing electricity service connection.