The appellant herein who is the owner in possession of 1.127 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.223/6-1 of Aluva Village and the building thereon, preferred a claim petition before the court below as E.A.No.49/02 challenging the execution proceedings under which he was admitted to be dispossessed. The court below as per the impugned order dismissed the claim petition under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rule 99 C.P.C. against which the present appeal is preferred.

2. The suit O.S.No.328/87 was filed before the Munsiff’s Courts, Aluva for partition of the property. The suit was decreed and thereafter, E.P. was filed as E.P.44/01. According to the appellant he purchased the petition schedule property from one Sulaiman as per sale deed no.1787/89 dated 27/7/1989 of the S.R.O., Aluva. The said Sulaiman purchased the property and building therein from one Padmavathi Ammal as per sale deed No.2382/86. Padmavathi Ammal had purchased kudikidappu right over the property as per order in O.A.No.409/72 dated 11/9/1972 of the Land Tribunal, Vazhakkulam. Subsequent to the abolition of the Land Tribunal Office, Vazhakkulam, the entire file was transferred to the Land Tribunal. Aluva and new number was assigned to the file as 336/76. Purchase certificate was issued in favour of Padmavathi Ammal from the Land Tribunal. Aluva on 10/8/1979. It is also averred that the petition schedule property and other properties originally belonged to Parattu Tharwad and it was outstanding on Kanom rights with one Neelakanta Iyer. Arumughan Chettiar, husband of Padmavathi Ammal had tenancy right over the shop-room under the original owner where he was running a vegetable shop. Behind that vegetable shop with the consent of the landlord Sankara Pillai Krishna Pillai Padmavathi Ammal constructed a shed in the year 1943. Subsequent to the enactment of the Land Reforms Act Padmavathi Ammal claiming herself to be entitled to purchase the kudikidappu right filed O.A.No.409/72. Since then she was holding the properties as fill owner with the knowledge of all persons including the original owners and intermediary Neelakanta Iyer and his successors-in-interest. Subsequent to the purchase of the land by Sulaiman, he renovated the building after demolishing the old structure there and rented out the same to M/s. Kerala Radient Roadways and subsequently evicted the tenant as per order in R.C.P.No.29/87. The appellant/petitioner is thus in exclusive possession and ownership of the plaint schedule building ever since its purchase in 1989. The predecessors-in-interest of Arumughan Chettiar filed a suit for partition of the property as O.S.No.10/59 before the Additional District Court, North Paravur. That suit was compromised except item No.6. In respect of item No.6 separate compromise was entered into between the parties on 23/9/1973. That compromise was also accepted by the court and a final decree was passed in respect of plaint schedule item No.6. As per the decree, Achuthan Pillai got 9/10 share in respect of item No.6 property. Neelakanda Iyer had filed another suit O.S.No.11/59 against Achuthan Pillai and others before the same court. The said suit was also decreed in terms of the compromise. Under the said compromise the property now owned and occupied by the petitioner/appellant was given to Ramachandran Nair. The 1st respondent herein filed O.S.No.328/87 for partition of the property alleging that an amount of Rs.8,500/- was paid on behalf of Raghavan Nair, Ramachandran Nair and others to Harihara Iyer and that Ramachandran Nair is in possession of the property on behalf of Raghavan Nair also and that Raghavan Nair has executed a sale deed in favour of the 1st respondent as document No.3539/83. Even though the plaintiff in O.S.No.328/87 had information that Padmavathi Ammal was having kudikidappu right over the property, she was not made a party nor her successors-in-interest were made a party. Even though there was an application filed by the 1st respond