IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 18TH MAGHA 1932 AS.No. 301 of 2000(A) -------------------------- OS.212/1994 of ADDL.SUB COURT, IRINJALAKUDA .................... APPELLANT(S):DEFENDANTS 1 & 3 ----------------------------------------- 1. DAVIS, S/O. PARAKKAL DAVASSY, KOTTANALLUR DESOM, VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. PAULSON, S/O. DAVIS, KOTTANALLUR DESOM, VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADVS. SMT.V.P.SEEMANDINI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S):PLAINTIFFS & 2ND DEFENDANT --------------------------------------------------------- 1. GRACY. W/O. PARAKKAL VARGHESE, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. 2. LINCY, D/O. 1ST RESPONDENT & VARGHESE, DO DO 3. LEENA, D/O. 1ST RESPONDENT & VARGHESE, DO DO 4. LITTY, D/O. 1ST RESPONDENT & VARGHESE, DO DO 5. LINSON, S/O. 1ST RESPONDENT & VARGHESE, DO DO 6. LIJOY, S/O. 1ST RESPONDENT & VARGHESE, DO DO 7. PEETER,S/O.DAVIS, KOTTANELLUR DESOM, VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. R1 SMT.GRACY (PARTY IN PERSON) R2, 3 & 4 BY ADV. SRI.LIJOY PARACKAL VARGHESE R6 SRI.LIJOY (PARTY IN PERSON) R5 SRI.LINSON (PARTY IN PERSON) R7 SRI.PEETER (PARTY IN PERSON) THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs 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/- The judgment dated 07.02.2011 in A.S.301/2000 and Cross Appeal is corrected as follows: 1. The words “and 'X' occurring in line 10 in paragraph 2 is deleted. 2. The figure shown as “4.2” in the 4th line of paragraph 3 is corrected as “4.25” 3. The words “to the appellants and respondents in the suit for their access to X and Y” occurring in the 10th and 11th lines of paragraph 3 are corrected and substituted by the words “to all the appellants and respondents in the appeal A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 & Cross Appeal -5- and cross appeal jointly as road for their access to the properties marked as 'X' and 'Y'. 4. The word “defence” occurring in the 17th line of paragraph 3 is corrected and substituted by the word “fence”. vide order dated 11.04.2011 in I.A.1233/2011. A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 & Cross Appeal -6- M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = A.S. NO. 301 OF 2000 & Cross Appeal = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T 7th February, 2011.