SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 1201

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prema – Appellant
Versus
Krishnaveni & Others – Respondents
A.S. No. 505 of 2021 & C.M.P. No. 20891 of 2021
Decided On : 01-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant:S. Suseela Devi, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1 & R2, V.V. Sathya, Advocate, R3 to R5, No appearance.

Ambiguity in property division and lack of pathway to reach the allotted portion can lead to the setting aside of judgment and final decree, and remand for re-survey and division of the land.

Headnote:

Ambiguity - Property Partition - The court set aside the judgment and final decree due to ambiguity in the division of property, remanding the matter for appointment of a new Advocate Commissioner to conduct a re-survey and divide the land as per the decree, ensuring provision of pathways to the divided properties for peaceful enjoyment by the parties.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, first defendant in the suit, contested the division of property as per the preliminary decree, citing ambiguity and lack of pathway to reach her portion of the property.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the ambiguity in the division of property hindered the parties from enjoying their respective portions, leading to the decision to set aside the judgment and final decree, and remand the matter for re-survey and division of the land.

Issues: Ambiguity in property division, lack of pathway to reach appellant's portion of the property.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the inability of the parties to enjoy the fruits of the preliminary decree due to ambiguity and lack of pathway, leading to the remand for re-survey and division of the land.

Final Decision: The judgment and final decree were set aside, and the matter was remanded for appointment of a new Advocate Commissioner to conduct re-survey and division of the property, with a directive to ensure provision of pathways to the divided properties for peaceful enjoyment by the parties.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 96 of C.P.C., praying to set aside the Judgment and final Decree dated 19.11.2018 passed in I.A.No.194 of 2017 in O.S.No.27 of 2014 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur.)

1. The Appeal Suit has been filed to set aside the Judgment and final Decree dated 19.11.2018 passed in I.A.No.194 of 2017 in O.S.No.27 of 2014 on the file of the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur.

2. The appellant is the first defendant in the suit and the respondents 1 and 2 herein are plaintiffs, instituted a suit for Partition.

3. The preliminary decree was passed, which became final and the rights of the parties are crystallized. Final decree proceedings were initiated through Interlocutory Application filed in I.A.No.194 of 2017 and the trial Court appointed an Advocate Commissioner to divide the property. Pursuant to the orders, the Advocate Commissioner visited the land, conducted survey and divided the land by metes and bounds. Based on the report of the Advocate Commissioner, final decree was passed by the trial Court in I.A.No.194 of 2017 dated 19.11.2018.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the Advocate Commissioner, while conducting survey and dividing the land as per the preliminary decree, committed a serious error and even as per the sketch, there is no pathway to reach the land allotted to the appellant. There is an ambiguity with reference to the division made and thus, the appellant is unable to enjoy her portion of the property, since there is no pathway to reach her property even as per the sketch.

5. In order to resolve the issues, this Court directed the parties to be present. Accordingly, both the appellant and the respondents 1 and 2 are present before this Court today.

6. The first respondent / Smt.Krishnaveni, after seeing the sketch relied on by the trial Court, which was submitted by the Advocate Commissioner, has stated that the sketch is wrong and there is a main road in front of the property allotted to the appellant. As per the sketch, there is no pathway for reaching the portion of the property allotted to the appellant. Further, the first respondent has stated that the sketch prepared by the Advocate Commissioner seems to be wrong.

7. That being the case, this Court is unable to form an opinion, whether there is a main road on the western side of the subject property or the road is situated on the eastern side of the property. The parties are unable to enjoy the fruits of the preliminary decree on account of this ambiguity and thus, this Court thought fit to remand back the matter for appointment of new Advocate Commissioner to survey the land and divide the same based on the decree already passed, enabling the parties to take possession of their respective portion for enjoyment.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant, made a submission that in fact there is no pathway to reach the property allotted and the sketch also reveals the same.

9. Considering the facts and circumstances, the judgment and final decree dated 19.11.2018 passed in I.A.No.194 of 2017 in O.S.No.27 of 2014 is set aside and the Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.194 of 2017 is taken on file. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the District and Sessions Court, Tiruvarur for appointing a new Advocate Commissioner, who in turn, shall conduct re-survey of the subject property and divide the land as per the decree. The said exercise is directed to be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

10. It is needless to state that the District and Sessions Court, Thiruvarur, shall ensure that pathway is provided to the divided properties enabling the parties to enjoy their respective portion of the properties peacefully.

11. Consequently, the Appeal Suit in A.S.No.505 of 2021 stands allowed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top