The appeal arises from judgment and decree of learned Sub Judge, Chengannur in A.S.No.11 of 2009 dismissing the appeal as it is filed out of time consequent to the dismissal of I.A.No.96 of 2009 to condone the delay. Respondents filed the suit for fixation of boundary, mandatory injunction and other reliefs claiming that the suit property along with other items originally belonged to the mother of appellant and respondent, Narayani Panickathi and after her death, the legal representatives including parties hereto partitioned the property as per document No.2805 of 2009. In that partition, item No.1, 15 cents was set apart to the share of Narayani Panickathy. She settled the same in favour of the respondent vide Ext.A3, settlement deed dated 09-121996. Property on the west of the said property is item No.2, 23 cents in the partition deed alloted to the appellant. Respondent wanted the boundary of the suit property to be fixed and a mandatory injunction to direct appellant to remove the structures allegedly put up in the suit property. Appellant denied that respondent is the owner in possession of the suit property and claimed that even prior to Ext.A2, partition deed he was in possession of the suit property. Trial court observed that the said plea of appellant is against recital in Ext.A2, partition
