Disposed

C.B.Bhaskaran v. C.D.Rajalakshmi

Madras HC25 Jul 2017CS/830/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court accepted a partition suit filed against the defendants who appeared in ex parte. Relying on the Commissioner's report on modes of division, the court allotted specific property portions to the plaintiffs representing their three-fourth share and dismissed the request for accounting regarding a second property item. A final decree was passed.

What did the court decide?

Final decree passed allotting schedule B property to plaintiffs for 3/4th share; directed payment to Commissioner; confined decree to first item.

C.B.Bhaskaran Vs C.D.Rajalakshmi — Partition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.03.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

C.S.No.830 of 2014
1.C.B.Bhaskaran
2.C.B.Sarojini
3.C.B.Dilly
... Plaintiffs
Vs.
1.C.D.Rajalakshmi
2.C.D.Malini
3.C.D.Rajkumar
4.C.D.Balakrishnan
... Defendants

¶7

Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C. read with Order XXIV of High Court Original Side Rules praying to pass a judgment and decree:

¶8

(a) for partition and division by metes and bounds of the item No.1 of the Plaint Schedule mentioned property comprised in Door NO.28, (Old Door No.1), Thiru-vi-ka Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014, measuring 1 Ground and 634 Sq.ft., more fully described in the plaint Schedule hereunder and allot their respective 3/4^th share therein;

¶9

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶10

¶11

(b) to direct the defendants to pay mesne profits and

¶12

¶13

For Plaintiffs : Mr.S.Subbiah For defendants : No appearance

¶14

J U D G M E N T

¶15

A preliminary decree for partition was granted allotting 3/4^th share in

¶16

the suit property to the plaintiffs in the suit item 1 and for mesne profits on 25^th July 2017. On the same day, this Court had appointed a Commissioner

¶17

to visit the property and suggest the modes of division. The Commissioner

¶18

has filed a report suggesting modes of division.

¶19

Since the defendants had remained exparte in the suit, also, I had

¶20

ordered notice to the defendants informing them about the reception of the Commissioner report. The defendants 2, 3 and 4 have been served. Notice sent to the 1^st defendant has been returned with an endorsement “Deceased”. The defendants 2, 3 and 4 are the legal representatives of the 1^st defendant. Hence, they are brought on record as the legal representatives of the 1^st defendant in the suit.

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

¶23

The Commissioner has filed a report suggesting allotment of the property shown as item 1 in the suit schedule. As per the report the red marked portion shown as schedule 'B' in the report in Annexure - A and B are suggested to be allotted to the plaintiffs towards 3/4^th share in the suit property and the Blue marked portion shown as schedule 'C' in the report of the Commissioner is suggested to be allotted to the defendants towards

¶24

their 1/4^th share.

¶25

Since there is no objection to the suggestions made by the Commissioner. The report of the Commissioner is accepted and the property shown as Schedule 'B' in the Commissioner's report which is also shown as red marked in Annexure A and B is allotted to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have filed a memo stating that they are not pressing for relief of accounting in respect of the 2^nd item of the property.

¶26

Hence, this final decree is confined only to the 1^st item of the property finally allotting to the plaintiffs the property shown as schedule B in the Commissioner report which is marked in red in Annexure A and B towards plaintiffs 3/4^th share.

¶27

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶28

¶29

6. The plaintiffs are directed to pay a further sum of Rs.10,000/- to

¶30

the Advocate Commissioner as additional remuneration.

¶31

21.03.2018
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Speaking Order
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiffs :

¶32

PW1 – Mr.C.B.Bhaskaran
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiffs:

¶33

*Sl.* *No.*	*Exhibits*	*Description*	*Dated*
1	Ex.P1	Certified copy of the partition deed.	04.07.1969
2	Ex.P2	Copy of the paper publication in Times of India.	04.02.1976
3	Ex.P3	Water and Sewerage tax receipts (series).	--
4	Ex.P4	Property tax payment receipt standing in the name of C.B.Rukmankathan paid for the second half of 1998.	--
5	Ex.P5	EB White Card for the period February 2006- 2008.	--
6	Ex.P6	Electricity payment receipt.	12.11.2012
7	Ex.P7	Office copy of the legal notice sent on behalf of the plaintiffs.	25.04.2014
8	Ex.P8	Acknowledgment cards.	--

¶34

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶35

¶36

*Sl.*	*Exhibits*	*Description*	*Dated*
*No.*
9	Ex.P9	Encumbrance certificate for item (1) of the suit property.	17.09.2014

¶37

List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants : NIL

¶38

List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: NIL

¶39

21.03.2018
dsa

¶40

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶41

¶42

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

dsa

C.S.No.830 of 2014

21.03.2018

http://www.judis.nic.in

C.B.Bhaskaran v. C.D.Rajalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.B.Bhaskaran v. C.D.Rajalakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.K.Natarajan Vs W.G.Pankajavalli

Smt.Indira Rajendran, Vs

Securities of Vijayarangam P R Vs

M/s.Razak Trading Company Vs M/s.Palaniappa Industries and

Will (8) of S.v.R.Chander Vs Ms.S.Pattammal

Will (3) of S.Kalyanasundaram Vs v.Rajalakshmi