IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2609 of 2010(O) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.2820/2000 IN OS.260/1994 of ADDL.SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANANDI, W/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT PEERANGI STREET, VADAMMANTHARA AMSOM, PALAKKAD TALUK BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU SRI.A.R.NIMOD SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MRS. M. KOMALAM, W/O. N.A. MANIKKAM, RESIDING AT BETHAL COTTAGE, VENKATARAMANAN COLONY, BACKSIDE OF MARIYAMMAN TEMPLE, EDAYARPALAYAM, KUNIYAMPUTHUR P.O., COIMBATORE 2. MRS. C. LATHA, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT 37, NETAJI ROAD, P.N. PUTHUR, COIMBATORE 3. G. SULOCHANA W/O. GANESH, RESIDING AT CHILLIMADA, KANJIKODE P.O. PALAKKAD 4. T. SIVAKAMI, W/O. THANKAVELU, C/O. P.R. NAGANATHAN, RESIDING AT 781, V.K. ROAD, PILAMEDU, COIMBATORE WP(C).No. 2609 of 2010(O) -:2:- 5. K. INDRANI, W/O. KANTHASWAMI, RESIDING AT 158, ANNAYAKODE ROAD, SRIGANALLUR, COIMBATORE 6. M. SYAMALA, W/O. M.M. SUNDARAM, RESIDING AT 13, KURUMBAR LANE, AVARAMPALAYAM ROAD, PILAMEDU, COIMBATORE 7. K. MANI, C/O. SELVARAJ, RESIDING AT 48B, 3RD STREET, SIVANANDAPURAM, SARAVANAMPATTI, COIMBATORE 8. R. CHANDRASEKHARAN, S/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT NO. 8/104, SWAMINAIKKANPALAYAM, NO. 4 VEERAPANDI P.O. COIMBATORE (NORTH), COIMBATORE 9. R. RAJINI, D/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT 12/307, D/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT 12/307, KURUPPATH VEED, KALLEPULLY, PALAKKAD 10. R. RADHA, D/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT 48/592, “RACHANA”, KOZHIMPARAMBA, VADAKKANTHARA P.O. PALAKKAD 11. R.RAJASEKHARAN, S/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT 12/307, KURUPPATH VEED, KALLEPPULLY, PALAKKAD 12. R. RAJESWARI, D/O. LATE RAJAM, RESIDING AT 15A, PUCHUD RAMASWAMY, SUGUNAPURAM, KUNIYAMPUTHUR P.O. COIMBATORE 13. R. RAJEEVKUMAR, S/O. LATE RAJAM RESIDING AT 12/307 KURUPPATH VEED, KALLEPPULLY, PALAKKAD 14. K. NATARAJAN, C/O. BALADHANDAPANI FINANCE, METRO BAZAAR, PALAKKAD 15. JAYANTHI, D/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT ALANKUR MOKKU, KUMARAPALAYAM EROD, TAMILNADU 16. SINDU, D/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT PEERANGI STREET, VADAKKANTHARA AMSOM, PALAKKAD TALUK 17. RAMANI, D/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT PEERANGI STREET, VADAKKANTHARA AMSOM, PALAKKAD TALUK WP(C).No. 2609 of 2010(O) -:3:- 18. MADHU, S/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT ALANKUR MOKKU, KUMARAPALAYAM, EROD, TAMILNADU 19. BABU, S/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT C/O. BANANA CHIPS CO., CHINNAPULLA STREET, PALAKKAD 20. SELVAN, S/O. LATE SHANMUGHAN, RESIDING AT C/O. BANANA CHIPS CO., CHINNAPULLA STREET, PALAKKAD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-01-2010 , THE COURT ON 27/01/2010 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P. ( Civil) No. 2609 of 2010 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated : 27th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT The Writ Petitioner who claims to have 1/10th share over 13 cents of land with an old tiled building thereon ordered to be partitioned in O.S. No. 260 of 1994 on the file of the Sub Court, Palakkad challenges the order dated 19-10-2009 in I.A. 2820 of 2000 as per which pursuant to an earlier direction issued by the court below had ordered sale of the property in auction between the sharers .The Court below posted the case to 18-11-2009 for the conduct of auction. The learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner submitted that the auction was not held on that day and it now stands adjourned to 30-1-2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the properties are divided by metes and bounds the petitioner can hopefully get an allotment of atleast one cent of land and thereby avert her ouster on to the streets. She is the widow of one of the sharers. W.P. ( Civil) No. 2609 of 2010 -:2:- 2. This Court is not able to decide at this distance of time as to whether the property can be divided by metes and bounds and thereby an auction between the sharers could be averted. It is reasonable to presume that the order for auction of the property between the sharers was passed after exploring the possibility of dividing the properties by metes and bounds. In case, the court below has not considered this aspect of the matter, it is made clear that the impugned order dated 19-10-2009 or the earlier orders passed in final decree application shall not stand in the way of exploring the possibility of a division by metes and bounds. Subject to this observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/-V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE) /true copy/ ani.