IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2009 / 8TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2058 of 2009(T) ------------------------- OS.65/2006 of SUB COURT, TIRUR .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ARAYALPARAMBIL KOUSALYA, W/O.M.P.SATHYAN MELE PULIKKAL HOUSE, VAZHATHIRUTHI AMSOM DESOM, P.O., CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE.20. BY ADV. MR.HARISH R. MENON MR.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- KORANGOTTU VASU, S/O.VELU, KOTTAKKAL AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE , ADV. MR.T.C.SURESH MENON , MR.JIBU P THOMAS, MR.P.S.APPU, MR.A.R.NIMOD, MR.ANOOP C.A. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 2058/2009-T APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN O.S. NO.216/2000 DATED 31/07/2002 BY THE MUNSIFF COURT PARAPPANANGADI. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN O.S. NO.65/2006 DATED 28/11/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE I.A. NO.634/2008 IN O.S. NO.65/2006. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT BELOW IN I.A. NO.634/2008 IN O.S. NO.65/2006. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 2058 OF 2009 ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 29th day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T The writ petition is filed by the defendant in OS.No.65/06 of Sub Curt, Tirur. The order impugned arise in a final decree proceeding in a suit for partition. The petitioner defendant moved an application under section 4 of the Partition Act setting forth a case that she is entitled to purchase the share of the plaintiff, who has obtained right over the property from another co-owner, her brother, under a sale deed. Admittedly, the property comprise of a building. The learned Munsiff dismissed the application holding that the petitioner is not entitled to claim the benefits under section 4 of the Partition Act. Ext.P4 is the copy of that order. Challenging the correctness and propriety of that order, the petitioner has filed the writ petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. I heard the learned counsel on both sides. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the WPC.2058/09 : 2 : petition may be disposed of reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the propriety and correctness of the impugned order, in case, any appeal is found necessary against the final decree to be passed in the proceedings. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection in disposing the writ petition as requested for. 3. Writ petition is disposed of reserving the right of the parties to challenge the correctness and propriety of Ext.P4 order in case any of them prefer an appeal against the final decree ultimately passed in the proceedings. (S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE) aks