JUDGMENT

The Counsel for the parties submit that the first respondent, who is the mother of the appellant and other respondents, is dead and she is survived only by the appellant and the other respondents and the right to sue survives only in their favour. The counsel also submit that they may be permitted to make necessary endorsement in the cause title.

The counsel are permitted to make a note in the cause title indicating the demise of the first respondent and that the appellant and other respondents are her only legal heirs, and the necessary note in the cause title is also made. The filing of the amended Memorandum of Appeal is dispensed with.

The appellant and the other respondents are present and are identified by their respective counsel, and they have filed a compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which reads as follows:

“MEMORANDUM OF COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER 23 RULE 3 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 The plaintiff/appellant and defendants/respondents above named jointly submit their compromise petition here as under:-

1. The subject matter of the suit is for partition and for separate possession of the suit schedule property bearing No.17 (Old No. 13/H), situated at 13th cross, Jayamahal extension BBMP ward No.92 Bangalore and bounded on East by Site No 13/1, West by: Road, North by road, South by Site No.13/G measuring East to West 48+51/2 ft, North to South 50 ft which is hereinafter referred as schedule property with construction thereon consisting and comprising varanda, drawing room, dining hall, two bedroom, one common bathroom.

2. The plaintiff appellant and defendants respondents above named jointly submit their compromise petition here as under. The dispute and controversy involved in the partition suit of the appellant and respondent came to be amicably settled between both the parties at the intervention of well wishers of both the parties and their relatives and friends, accordingly both the parties have agreed to submit this compromise petition for disposal of above appeal in terms mentioned here as under.

3. The suit of the plaintiff before the Trail court is for partition and for separate possession by meets and bounds to the extent of their definite share in accordance with Islamic law of inheritance and succession. The parties appellant and respondents are governed under Islamic law the provision under Islamic law stipulates that whole estate of deceased Mohammadan if he dies intestate are so much of it have not been disposed of the legal heirs succeed to the estate of deceased as tenants in common to their specific shares. The heirs can partition in respect of the properties that are being left over by deceased.

4. The property of the deceased devolves on his legal heirs immediately after the moment of his death. The estate of the deceased vests immediately in each heir in proportion of share ordained by Islamic law as the interest in each share is separate and distinct. Hence the suit for partition of share of each sharer is definitely maintainable in law. That any single sharer can file a suit for partition and separate possession of her ancestral property i.e being left over by deceased. The Islamic law admits only ownership limited but unlimited in duration.

5. The subject matter of the property originally belongs to Mohammed Ali S/o Abdul Rahman who had purchased the schedule property by way of public auction and sale deed was executed on him on 8-6-1979 under registered Document No. 451/79-80 in pages 195/197 volume No.2722 Book No.I dated 8-6-1979 in the office of Sub Registrar Gandhinagar Bangalore from Bangalore Development Authority which was residential site bearing No 17 (Old No 13/H), situated at 13th cross, Jayamahal extension BBMP ward No.92 Bangalore and bounded on East by Site No.13/1, West by: Road, North by road, South by Site No 13/G measuring East to West 48+51/2ft, North to South 50 ft, which is hereinafter referred as schedule proper