C.K. Jayaja vs C.G. Padmalatha

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.—We have seen the endorsement of the office following the earlier order. No further notice need be issued.

This appeal arises from the final decree in a suit for partition. The short issue arising for decision is as to whether the appealing defendant had an opportunity to object to the commissioner''s report obtained in the final decree proceedings.According to her, she had filed objections, however, that it was not considered by the court below. As a matter of fact, it appears that the commissioner''s report was returned for curing defects and the learned Counsel for the appellant is right in pointing out that the said objections were obtained from the court below on return, after the matter was decided and the same has been placed on record in this Court along with I.A.1932/05. We have seen the said statement of objections with endorsements and we are satisfied that the matter deserves re-consideration at the hands of the court below.

For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned final decree is set aside and the matter is remitted to the court below to consider the objections raised by the defendant to the commissioner''s report. The said objections are received by this Court and would stand transmitted forthwith, along with LCR, if received. For this purpose, I.A.1932/10 is allowed. Since the respondent did not appear, the court below will issue notice to that party. The appellant is directed to appear before the court below on 1.12.2010. The appeal is ordered accordingly.