IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2008 / 15TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23661 of 2008(P) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA. 5733 /2000 IN OS.298/1999 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. SIVADAS, S/O.T.C.RAVEENDRANATHAN, KOUSTHUBAM, MANAKKAPARAMBIL, AZAD ROAD, KOCHI-17. 2. KRISHNADAS, S/O.T.C.RAVEENDRANATH, KOUSTHUBHAM, MANAKKAPARAMBIL, AZAD ROAD, KOCHI-17. BY ADV. SRI.BABU PAUL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. V.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.LATE AMMINI AMMA, GOPAL SADAN, ELANADU.P.O, CHELAKKARA, TRICHUR. 2. GEETHA KRISHNAKUMAR, 'KRISHNAGEETHAM', 34,1502, PUTHUKKALAVATTOM ROAD, ELAMKULAM, COCHIN-16. 3. MASTER ANAND KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.LATE KRISHNAKUMAR, REP.BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN GEETHA KRISHNAKUMAR, 'KRISHNAGEETHAM', 34, 1502, PUTHUKKALAVATTOM ROAD, ELAMKULAM, COCHIN-16. 4. MASTER ARAVIND KRISHNAKUMAR, S/O.LATE KRISHNAKUMAR, REP.BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN GEETHA KRISHNAKUMAR, 'KRISHNAGEETHAM', 34,1502, PUTHUKKALAVATTOM ROAD, ELAMKULAM, COCHIN-16. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.23661 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th August, 2008. J U D G M E N T This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the legal heirs of deceased first defendant in O.S.No.298 of 1999, on the file of sub Court, Ernakulam. The suit is one for partition. I.A.No.5733 of 2000 was filed for passing a final decree in accordance with the preliminary decree. At the final decree stage, parties filed compromise petition which was recorded by the court and Ext.P1 final judgment and decree was passed in terms of the compromise. Ext.P1 final decree was passed on 30.11.2002. First defendant, T.C.Raveendranath, died on 4.4.2004. The legal heirs of T.C.Raveendranath filed I.A.No.2139 of 2006 to get themselves impleaded in the final decree before the trial court. It was dismissed by learned Sub Judge holding that final decree has already been passed. 2. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that though final decree was passed, as the non- judicial stamp papers for engrossing the final decree was not W.P.(C) No.23661 of 2008 2 produced, necessary non-judicial stamp papers have to be supplied and unless petitioners are impleaded, they cannot produce the non- judicial stamp papers, and, therefore, learned Sub Judge should have allowed the application. 3. Affidavit filed in support of Ext.P3 petition does not disclose the reason for impleading them in the final decree. When the final decree was passed, learned Sub Judge was justified in dismissing the application for impleading the legal heirs of one of the parties. In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with Ext.P4 order. But in view of the submission that non-judicial stamp papers cannot be produced by the legal heirs of the deceased first defendant, T.C.Raveendranath, when they are not impleaded, it is made clear that petitioners are entitled to file a fresh petition to implead them along with a prayer to receive the requisite non judicial stamp papers for engrossing the final decree. If such an application is filed, learned Sub Judge to pass appropriate orders in the application, in accordance with law. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.