YERRAMILLI SATYANANDAN Vs. YERRAMILLI PUDRA RAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of all these appeals is a final decree which was put in execution by respondent 1, the decree-holder.

(2.) The circumstances culminating in these appeals may be briefly stated. The first respondent laid an action for partition and separate possession of his properties in O. S. No. 51 of 1939 on the file of the Subordinate Judges Court, Amalapuram. A preliminary decree was passed on 26-2-1941. Appeals were preferred to the High Court of Madras in A. S. Nos. 118 and 248 of 1941 against this preliminary decree which ultimately ended in a compromise and a preliminary decree dated 8-4-1943 was passed in terms of the memorandum of compromise filed by the parties. Pursuant to this com-promise, the plaintiff filed a petition for the appointment of a commissioner to divide the out standings due to the family as per the schedule attached to the com-promise decree and the Court appointed a Commissioner, who submitted a report dividing the out standings. After hearing the objections of the parties, a final decree was passed by the trial Court on 13-8-1947. Among the several directions was the one embodied in Clause 3 of the final decree enabling the plaintiff to recover Rupees 22,821-4-3 being his half share of the outstandings as per schedules V and VI attached to the written statement, with interest at six per cent per annum from 1-4-1943 till date of payment. It is unnecessary for us to refer to the other terms of the decree, as nothing turns upon them.

(3.) The aggrieved defendants preferred an appeal against this decree. The High Court made changes in regard to several terms of the decree by its judgment and decree dated 29-11-51 in A. S. No. 715 of 1947. The only modification that has a significance in this enquiry is that contained in Clause 5 of the High Courts decree, which is in these words: