1. Petitioners 1 and 4 to 8, deceased George (the predecessor-in-interest of petitioners 2 and 3) and the respondent jointly filed a suit for partition. The suit property is having an extent of 19.750 cents. The plaintiffs claimed 5/6 shares and the defendants claimed 1/6 share. A preliminary decree was passed on 20.10.2004 directing to divide the property and allot 5/6 shares to the plaintiffs and 1/6 share to the defendants. Thereafter I.A.No.892 of 2005 was filed by the plaintiffs for passing a final decree. The advocate commissioner appointed reported that division of the property by metes and bounds was impossible and he suggested to auction the plaint schedule property among the sharers.

2. Thereafter the plaintiffs, except the 1st petitioner herein, filed an application as I.A.No.4092 of 2008 seeking auction of the plaint schedule property. Later, on 16.07.2009, on consensus of the parties, the trial court fixed the upset price of the plaint schedule property at Rs. 13,00,000/-. On 30.07.2009 the auction was conducted and the respondent bid the auction for a price of Rs. 24,90,000/-. On 30.07.2009 itself the respondent deposited Rs. 6,22,500/-, that being ¼ of Rs. 24,90,000/-. Thereafter on 31.07.2009, the trial court confirmed auction of the plaint schedule property in the respondent's name. On 10.08.2009, he deposited a further amount of Rs. 14,52,500/-, that being the balance amount after deducting his 1/6 share in Rs. 24,90,000/-.

3. Immediately thereafter the defendants in the suit filed a cheque application before the court seeking permission to withdraw their 1/6 share in the bid amount. As per the order dated 22.08.2009, the trial court ordered to issue a cheque for Rs. 4,15,000/- in favour of the defendants and they withdrew the amount. Thus from the total bid amount deposited by the respondent, balance Rs. 16,60,000/- remained in deposit in the Sub Treasury, Irinjalakuda.

4. Subsequently on 10.09.2009, the trial court passed a final decree holding that the plaint schedule property had been bid in auction by the respondent for the above said amount and the auction had been confirmed in his name. Further, the trial court directed the sharers to deposit value of the non-judicial stamp paper for engrossing the final decree.

5. As directed, the respondent remitted a further amount of Rs. 1,30,750/-, being the value of non-judicial stamp paper for engrossing the final decree and it was engrossed on stamp paper. Then the respondent filed execution petition (E.P.No.259 of 2010) against said George seeking delivery of the plaint schedule property. While so, George filed an appeal (A.S.No.5 of 2010) before the Principal Sub Court, Irinjalakuda challenging the final decree order. Despite service of notice on all the parties, no one, except the respondent, entered appearance in the appeal and contested. Meanwhile, separate applications were filed on 07.04.2010 by petitioners 1, 4 and 5 to 8 seeking permission to withdraw their 1/6 share in Rs. 24,90,000/- after deducting their contribution towards the value of stamp paper produced for engrossing the final decree. Then, on 28.06.2010, they themselves got the cheque applications dismissed as not pressed.

6. As per judgment dated 31.03.2011, the first appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by George. Thereafter, he filed a regular second appeal (R.S.A.No.810 of 2011) before this Court. On 21.07.2011 this Court admitted the second appeal and passed an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to the final decree. In the second appeal also the respondent alone contested.

7. Despite elapse of more than three years after deposit of Rs. 20,75,000/- by the respondent before the court below, the final decree did not attain finality and the amount was lying in civil court deposit without fetching interest. Therefore, the respondent, anticipating that there might be further delay in the final disposal of the second appeal, filed Ext.P2 application before this Co