IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
AS.No. 301 of 2000(A)
1. DAVIS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. GRASSY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.LIJOY P.VARGHESE(PARTY IN PERSON)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :07/02/2011
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 7th day of February , 2011.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the
judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate
Judge, Irinjalakuda in O.S.212/94 by defendants
1 and 3. During the pendency of the appeal the
parties have compromised the matter and has
filed I.A.438/11. So in the light of the
compromise it has become necessary to pass a
revised preliminary decree for partition as
follows and also making the subject matter
available for a final decree.
2. There are two schedules of property
described as A and B. As per the total extent, A
schedule property is 2.15 acres and that of B
schedule is 72 cents. A schedule property is
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
-2-
divided into 2 equal halves and as per the terms
and conditions one acre and 7.5 cents marked as
‘X’ in Sy.No.483/Kottanlloor village is set
apart and allotted to petitioners 3 to 8 in the
petition who are respondents 1 to 6 in the
appeal and the plaintiffs jointly and ‘X’. The
other half i.e. the eastern half having an
extent of one acre and 7.5 cents marked as Y in
Sy.No.483/Kottanlloor village is set apart to
the share of petitioners 1 and 2 and 9 in the
petition who are the appellants and the 7th
respondent in the appeal.
3. So far as the B schedule property is
concerned out of the B schedule an extent of
8.5. cents marked as ‘Z’ in Sy.No.484/2 having a
length of 80.9 mtrs. and width of 4.2. mtrs.
starting from the Panchayath road on the west
and passing through the southern extremity of
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
-3-
the property in Sy.No.484/2 of the Kottanlloor
village and reaching the northern side of the
properties marked as ‘X’ and ‘Y’ is set apart
and allotted to the appellants and respondents
in the suit for their access to ‘X’ and ‘Y’.
The balance extent of the property in B schedule
i.e. minus ‘Z’ portion is set apart and allotted
to the petitioners 1, 2 and 9 in the petition,
i.e. the appellants and the 7th respondent
jointly. The parties also agreed that while
putting up the boundary or defence they shall
ensure that the road portion marked as ‘Z’
mentioned above is having a clear width of 14
feet for its entire length. It is also agreed
between the parties that no party shall put up
any construction or improvement on the road.
4. So a revised preliminary decree is
passed and the allotment is also there with
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
-4-
respect to the properties as detailed in the
compromise petition but the parties have to move
a formal application for passing a final decree
for partition so as to engross it on the stamp
paper for which the parties may have to furnish
the valuation of the property as well. The
compromise petition is recorded and the
compromise petition and the sketch shall form
part of the revised preliminary decree.
The appeal as well as the cross appeal are
disposed of accordingly.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
-5-
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = =
A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 &
Cross Appeal
= = = = = = = = = = =
J U D G M E N T
7th February, 2011.
