J U D G M E N T

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.

This appeal is on behalf of the estate of the defendant.

2. The plaintiffs are non-testamentary heirs of late Kunhambu who, and the original appellant, the defendant(since deceased) jointly obtained Ext.A1 certificate of purchase through the Land Tribunal. That the plaintiffs are the non-testamentary heirs of late Kunhambu, is not disputed.

3. The suit was resisted apparently on the premise that the series of transactions evidenced by the documents produced before the court below would show that the defendant had independent right to different items of properties.

4. This appeal by the defendants was considered for admission and it has been admitted on the short issue as to whether the appealing defendants have any claim to exclusive rights over the property covered as per Ext.A1. For the sake of brevity, we may quote the relevant portion of order dated 20th June 2011:

“This appeal is by the legal representatives of the sole defendant in a suit for partition. The plaint proceeds on the basis that the defendant and the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs jointly obtained Ext.A1 certificate of purchase under KLR Act. That property is so