IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17475 of 2009(O) -------------------------- OS.154/1998 of I ADDL.MUNSIFF COURT (RENT CONTROL COURT) TRIVANDRUM . .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. PREMAKUMARI, W/O.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, AGED 46 YEARS, T.C.37/936, KOTTAKKAKOM, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O.NEELAKANDA PILLAI, AGED 50 YEARS, T.C.37/936, KOTTAKKAKOM, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.J.JAYAKUMAR, MR.N.R.SURESH KUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. N.NANDAKUMAR, S/O.NEELAKANTA PILLAI, T.C.37/936, KOTTAKKAKOM, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT T.C.40/685, ISWARYA, THEKKEKOTTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. JAYACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O.NEELAKANTA PILLAI, T.C.37/936, KOTTAKKAKOM, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. RAJI K.R., W/O.NANDAKUMAR, T.C.37/936, KOTTAKKAKAM, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. NOW RESIDING AT T.C.40/685, ISWARYA, THEKKEKOTTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.17475 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 24th June, 2009 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: 1. To pass an order directing the Addl. Munsiff's (Rent Control) Court, Thiruvananthapuram to direct the Commissioner to ascertain prayer No.2 also in Ext.P5 Commission Application. 2. Grant such other relief that this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. Petitioners are defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.154/98 on the file of the Additional Munsiff Court, Trivandrum. The above suit was one for partition in which a preliminary decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff allotting him 1/7th share in the plaint property. Pursuant thereto, these petitioners along with another, 6th defendant filed an application for passing of a supplementary preliminary decree which too after trial was allowed allotting 2/7th shares to the first petitioner and 1/7th share to the second petitioner. Thus, the petitioners together got 3/7th shares in the plaint property which is a small piece of land having an extent of 2.209 cents comprising a building. It is the case of the petitioners that they are residing in that building and the above extent of land takes in a pathway also. Now W.P.C.No.17475/09 - 2 - the final decree proceedings are in progress, in which a commission has been deputed to measure the property so as to have a division as among the shares in accordance with the preliminary decree passed. Naturally, the commissioner has to furnish the data to work out the equities, if any, to be followed in effecting division by metes and bounds. The petitioners have filed an application seeking a direction from the court to the commissioner for valuation of the building so that they could purchase the shares of other sharers by paying the price fixed by the commissioner. The learned Munsiff disallowed that prayer under Ext.P7 order. The legality, propriety and correctness of that order is challenged in the Writ Petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this court vested under Article 227 of the Constitution. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances presented and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, I find, no notice need be served on the respondents and hence it is dispensed. It is open to the petitioner to move an application under Section 2 of the Partition Act before the court so as to obtain the right of the other sharers by paying the price thereof fixing the valuation of the building as well as the land in accordance with law. If any such application is moved by the petitioners within a period of three weeks W.P.C.No.17475/09 - 3 - from the date of this judgment, the learned Munsiff shall pass appropriate orders/directions to the commissioner already appointed to collect and furnish the data for disposal of that petition. Ext.P7 order, it is made clear, will not stand in the way of passing appropriate orders on such an application, if so moved by the petitioners. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE