IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 RFA.No. 350 of 2010 ----------------------------- (OS.NO.200/1992 OF SUB COURT,KOCHI) .................... APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: ------------------------------------------ 1. A.D.SUDHAKARAN, S/O.DAMODHARAN ATHIMALIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULLARDESOM ROAD, PALLURUTHY. 2. GOURI, W/O.DAMODHARAN, ATHIMALIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY, COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR, SRI.B.S.SURAJ KRISHNA, SRI.P.H.SHAJI (THRIKKAKARA). RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: -------------------------------------- A.D.BHANUMATHI, W/O.RAGHUVARAN PARATHAMPARAMBIL VEEDU, PULLARDESOM PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, COCHIN-6. BY THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.F.A. NO. 350/2010: ORDER ON I.A. NO. 1990/2010 IN R.F.A. NO. 350/2010 CLOSED 15/06/2010. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... R.F.A.NO.350 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the order in O.S.No.200/1992 of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Kochi. As per the preliminary decree, the plaintiff is entitled to one out of three shares and the remaining to the respondents. The appellants have purchased the other share and they are entitled to two out of three shares. The total property involved in the case is about 6.895 cents. Out of this, 0.200 cents is set apart to be used as pathway. The Commissioner, who inspected the property had divided and set apart plot A to the share of the plaintiff in the final decree and the remaining plot to the appellants herein. Total extent of the property which is allotted to the share of the plaintiff is only 2.010 cents out of the total extent of 6.895 cents. The main grievance is that the entire property should be allotted to the present respondent and she is prepared to give amount towards equilisation of shares. 6 cents of land can be divided and has been divided and as far as possible law : 2 : R.F.A.NO.350 OF 2010 envisages partition of the property and it is only in exceptional cases other mode is alloted. It is the settled principle that suppose a co-owner without consent effects improvements in the property and if it affects the share of the others, equity cannot be worked out in such cases. It is reported in the decision reported in Kassinkunju v. Velayudhan Pialli (1972 KLT 861). The Commissioner has alloted the property in the most equitable manner and just because the appellants want the entire property to be given to them, one cannot classify the partition as improper and therefore, I decline to admit the appeal. The appeal is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 3 : R.F.A.NO.350 OF 2010