widest possible discretion, power and jurisdiction to take all such measures as are necessary, in the wake of preliminary decree (which only declares the rights) for effecting the partition, the possible "further directions" that may be issued in such regard including what is permitted by Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Partition Act in case such law is invoked or any other direction (in case Partition Act cannot be applied or its invocation does not lead to resolution). The issuance of commission under Order XXVI Rule 13 CPC, noticeably, is with the intent ―to make the partition or separation ‖ . Therefore, should the commissioner be able to ―divide the property - which would be by ‖ metes and bounds, his report, if accepted as fair, equitable and just, leads to the partition being effected by shares being allotted to the respective shareholders - the element of owelty being added, as envisaged in Order XXVI Rule 14(1) CPC. The order of the court confirming the report of the commissioner (may be with some variance) in terms of Order XXVI Rule 14 CPC leads to the final determination of the rights of the parties by ―effecting a partition and being an order ‖ which is "final" would undoubtedly be an "instrument of partition" within the meaning of Section 2(15) of Indian Stamps Act, 1899 attracting the stamp duty. In such result of the litigation, the rights of the parties as to their respective shares in the property having been declared by the preliminary decree, the right to specific share earmarked by division of the property by metes and bounds stands determined and ―vested in each of them and, therefore, such order ‖ disposes of the suit (qua the particular property), it consequently being a decree that is final.
