IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 RFA.No. 200 of 2006 ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06/03/2006 IN I.A.3157/2003 IN IA.1136/03 IN OS.389/2003 of PRL.SUB COURT,THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT / CLAIM PETITIONER: ------------------------------------------------------ VASANTHI, D/O.CHETTUPUZHA DAMODARAN AND W/O.KANDIRATH MURALIDHARAN, PERAMANGALAM VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN SRI.S.SHYAM RESPONDENT / IST RESPONDENT / PLAINTIFF ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- HARIDAS, S/O.POTTUTHADATHIL ACHUTHAN EZHUTHACHAN, PERAMANGALAM VILLAGE, DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK. ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.F.A.No.200 OF 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of January 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. This appeal is at the instance of a claim petitioner whose application under order 21 Rule 58 of the Code of Civil Procedure was dismissed by the court below. While impugning the order, the appellant contends that the court below has passed the order without proper application of mind. 2. It was contended by the appellant in the claim petition that he had purchased 16 cents out of 1 acre 18 cents belonging to the defendant even prior to the institution of the suit. According to the appellant, the assignment in his favour with respect to 16 cents was on May 5, 2003 whereas the court below had issued notice in the suit only on May 7, 2003. But the court below was not impressed with the above and other similar contentions raised by the appellant in the claim petition. 3. When this appeal came up for consideration today, it is submitted by learned counsel for the plaintiff/respondent No.1 that the plaintiff is prepared to acknowledge and accept the exclusive right of the appellant over 16 cents of the scheduled property which the appellant/claimant obtained by virtue of sale deed No.1330/2003 SRO R.F.A.No.200 OF 2006 :: 2 :: Mundur (Ext.A1). It is submitted by the learned counsel that the order of attachment need be confined only to the remaining extent of the property in question. Respondent/plaintiff has filed a petition in this regard incorporating the above statement. The said statement is taken on record. The impugned order is set aside. Appeal is allowed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE jes