THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4983 of 2010 Dated:18.11.2010 Between: Dariyasabgari Salar Saheb, And others. ….Petitioners And Peerunayakgari Abeedunnisa, And others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4983 of 2010 ORDER: In the suit, being O.S.No.123 of 1988, on the file of the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Vayalpad, for partition the petitioners are defendants 26, 27 and 28. The suit was decreed on 14.02.1990 by passing a preliminary decree. The decree holders took out execution in O.E.P.No.19 of 2006. An Advocate Commissioner was appointed. He invited work memoranda and submitted the sketch plan and report dividing the property into metes and bounds as per the shares declared and allotted by the Court. At that stage, the petitioners herein filed counter contending that item 5 of the E.P schedule, being land in survey No.26/2, exclusively belonged to them, that they filed a comprehensive suit, being O.S.No.33 of 2004, for declaration and title, that in I.A.No.51 of 2007, the Court granted ad interim injunction and, therefore, item 5 should be deleted from the E.P schedule. The objection was overruled and E.P was allowed, aggrieved by which, the present civil revision petition is filed. The Court heard the Counsel for the petitioners. He mainly emphasized the interim injunction in I.A.No.51 of 2007 in O.S.No.33 of 2004 wherein the petitioners claimed exclusive right item 5 of E.P schedule. If ultimately they succeed in the suit, they can always proceed in accordance with law. But, so far as the partition suit is concerned, when the preliminary decree has become final and the same has been worked out and a final decree is passed, the petitioners cannot be allowed to agitate about the deletion of item of property which was originally included in the suit filed in 1988. This Civil Revision Petition is misconceived, and the same is accordingly dismissed. __________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 18.11.2010 vs