P.N. Ravindran, J.

The appeal is against the common order passed in E.A.No.148/2005 in E.P.No.21/2005 in O.S.No.33/1998 on the file of the Subordinate Judge's Court, Nedumangad. The appellant herein is one of the decree holders. It is stated that there are several items of properties covered by the partition decree. The appellant filed E.A.No.148/2005 invoking the provisions of Order 21, Rule 97 C.P.C., to remove obstruction and to effect the delivery, when certain persons obstructed the Amin to effect delivery on 30.10.2005. The same was in respect of the property demarcated in Ext.C1(b) plan to the final decree for partition. Apart from the application filed by the appellant as E.A.No.148/2005, there were several claim petitions which have been numbered as E.A.Nos.141/2005, 2/2009, 4/2009 and 5/2009 and all these were disposed of by the common order.

2. Apparently the view taken by the court below is that in a decree for partition, the application to remove obstruction filed by the decree holder and the other claim petitions cannot be gone into by the court. While considering the matter, from paragraph 27 onwards, the court has considered the nature of decree passed in a