High Court Kerala High Court

P.S.Sabu vs Madhavai Sankaran on 8 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
P.S.Sabu vs Madhavai Sankaran on 8 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RFA.No. 521 of 2008()


1. P.S.SABU, S/O.LATE SANKARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. MADHAVAI SANKARAN, W/O.LATE SANKARAN,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.J.THOMAS

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN

 Dated :08/11/2010

 O R D E R

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan

& P.Bhavadasan, JJ.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

R.F.A.No.521 of 2008-E

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 8th day of November, 2010.

Judgment

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.

1.Defendant in a suit for partition is the

appellant. He is the son of the plaintiff.

2.Late Sankaran and the plaintiff had two children;

defendant and daughter Bindu. Sankaran died

intestate. Suit property devolved on the

plaintiff, defendant and Bindu in equal shares.

The daughter Bindu released her share in favour

of the plaintiff and defendant. Thus, the mother

and son became the co-owners. The mother had to

sue for partition, claiming equal rights.

3.Defendant pleaded that building was put up

spending his funds and that the plaintiff was

residing with the defendant and the income

RFA521/08 -: 2 :-

derived from the building was being given to the

plaintiff. There is no cogent evidence regarding

any loan availed or of expenditure incurred in

that regard by the defendant. Under such

circumstances, the title being not disputed, the

suit for partition stands.

4.According to the appellant-defendant, even after

the preliminary decree, there were distress

actions by the financing institutions against the

property and the defendant had paid off amounts

to save the property from distress action.

Obviously, this is a matter that could be taken

care of in the final decree proceedings. The

plaintiff’s counsel also states that his client

had also paid off amounts to the financing

institutions. Obviously, therefore, both sides

have claims of having spent funds to preserve the

suit property pending the litigation.

5.In the aforesaid circumstances, while affirming

the preliminary decree, we direct that the

RFA521/08 -: 3 :-

parties will be at liberty to move in the final

decree proceedings for appropriate accounting

regarding the expenditure incurred by either side

to clear off the debts and preserve the suit

property. The payments so made would also be

reckoned by the court below for appropriate

adjustments and orders to provide equitable

allotment in the final decree proceedings.

In the result, this appeal as against the

preliminary decree is dismissed, subject to the

directions issued herein above as regards the

final decree proceedings. The court below will

consider expediting the proceedings, having

regard to the age of the plaintiff. No costs.

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,
Judge.

P.Bhavadasan,
Judge.

Sha/0412