IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 25TH JULY 2008 / 3RD SRAVANA 1930 AS.No. 807 of 1999(B) --------------------- OS.978/1993 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT: 1ST PLAINTIFF: ------------------------------------------- KANAKALATHA ALIAS KANAKAM, D/O.KANIYAMPARAMBIL NARAYANAN, ERAVU VILLAGE AND DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.P.SAMUEL RESPONDENTS: DEFENDANTS & PLAINTIFFS 2 TO 4: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BOSE, S/O.KANIYAMPARAMBIL NARAYANAN, ERAVU VILLAGE, P.O.ERAVU, THRISSUR DIST. 2. AMBIKA, W/O.KANIYAMPARAMBIL VELYAUDHAN, PALAZHI DESOM, KARAMUCK VILLAGE, P.O.MANALOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THOPPIL UNNI, CHETTUPUZHA DESOM, PULLASHI VILLAGE, P.O.CHETTUPUZHA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. BABY, W/O.THOPPIL UNNI AND D/O.KANIYAMPARAMBIL NARAYANAN, PULLAZHI VILLAGE, CHETTUPPUZHA DESOM, P.O.CHETTUPUZHA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O.THOPPIL UNNI, PULLAZHI VILLAGE, CHETTUPUZHA DESOM, P.O.CHETTUPUZHA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. JAYA, W/O.C.S.DINESAN AND D/O.THOPPIL UNNI, CHETTUPUZHA DESOM, PULLAZHI VILLAGE, P.O.CHETTUPUZHA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN - R1 & R2 THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.2376/2001 IN AS NO.807/1999 - DISMISSED ORDER ON I.A.NO.2970/2008 IN A.S.NO.807/1999 - CLOSED 25/07/2008 SD/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J ============== A.S.No. 807 of 1999 ==================== Dated this the 25th day of July, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed by the 1st plaintiff in a suit for partition and her grievance urged through the appeal memo is that the court below has excluded the residential house situated on the property from partition invoking Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, which dis-entitles female members of the family to share in the dwelling house. The issue seriously arising for decision of the appeal is whether the trial court was justified in excluding the dwelling house from partition. The contesting respondents namely, respondents Nos. 1 and 2 have submitted an affidavit before this Court stating that they have given up their contentions under Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act. Now, that the contentions of respondents 1 and 2, based on Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, have been given up, the appeal is only to be allowed. I accept the affidavit and set aside the preliminary decree passed by the court below and pass a fresh preliminary decree and judgment directing partition of the A.S.No. 807 of 1999 2 entire plaint schedule properties by metes and bounds and allotment of 3 out of 5 shares to the plaintiffs. It is open to either parties to apply for passage of final decree before the court below. The appeal is allowed as above. No costs. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE bkn/-