The court affirmed that final decree proceedings under the Partition Act must adhere to clear judicial directives and allowed parties the right to participate in property auction sales as mandated by earlier rulings.

ORDER :

S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY, J.

1. Petitioners are before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 05.12.2020 passed in FDP No.3/2006 by the Court of V Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Benglauru City.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Facts leading to filing of this petition as revealed from the records are, OS No.3721/1985 was filed seeking the relief of partition and separate possession of the suit schedule property. The said suit was decreed on 28.01.2002. Final order in terms of the preliminary decree passed in OS No.3721/1985 was passed by the Trial Court in FDP No.3/2006 on 18.07.2012. Challenging the same, petitioners herein had filed RFA No.1479/2012 which was dismissed by this Court on 30.01.2020 with a direction to the Trial Court to conclude the final decree proceedings expeditiously. Thereafter, the order impugned was passed by the Trial Court partly accepting the Court Commissioner's Report dated 14.08.2009 which was filed in FDP No.3/2006. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioners are before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the Trial Court has misread the order passed by this Court in RFA No.1479/2012. No enquiry on the Sale Deeds has been held by the Trial Court inspite of there being a specific direction in RFA No.1479/2012. He submits that petitioners herein have filed applications under Sections 2 and 3 of the Partition Act, 1893 and till date, no orders have been passed on the same.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents have argued in support of the order impugned. They submit that inspite of there being a specific direction to the Trial Court to conclude the final decree proceedings within a time frame, the petitioners have been raising unnecessary objections which has prolonged the disposal of the final decree proceedings. They submit that as on the date of order, no application was filed by any of the parties under Sections 2 and 3 of the Partition Act, 1893. Therefore, the order impugned cannot be found fault with. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the petition.

6. Petitioners herein had filed RFA No.1479/2012 challenging the judgment and decree dated 18.07.2012 passed in FDP No.3/2006. In the said appeal, a specific contention was raised on behalf of the petitioners that in the earlier appeal filed challenging the preliminary decree i.e., RFA No.556/2002, when the matter was remanded, there was a specific direction to hold an enquiry with regard to the Sale Deeds which were executed in favour of the first defendant in respect of undivided share of suit schedule A property and the same has not been complied. The said contention was considered and in paragraph Nos.76 and 77 of the order passed in RFA No.1479/2012, it has been observed as follows:-

"76. In this connection, Final Decree Proceedings are not made optional to the parties. On the other hand, there was definite direction of the court to conduct final decree proceedings in order to adjudicate the particular point. In this connection, there was no alternative except to conduct final decree proceedings for the trial court and also to the parties to participate therein to adjudicate the matter. In this connection, it is not a remand, but it is a process wherein this court ordered the trial court to deal with and dispose of the matter pertaining to the sale deeds. The words