AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravi Malimath
In the plaintiffs suit seeking to declare the partition deed dated 30.04.2002 as not binding on the plaintiff, the defendant No. 3 filed I.A. No. 3 u/s 151 of the CPC seeking permission to alienate his half- share in the properties listed in the schedule. The Trial Court by the impugned order dated 18.02.2012 has dismissed the said application. Hence, the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has incurred huge debts and the alienation of the properties listed in the schedule is necessary in order to fulfill those debts.
Counsel for the plaintiff / respondent No. 1 herein submits that he has no objection to the said application, permitting defendant No. 3 to alienate the properties and to sell the same. Notwithstanding no objections by the plaintiff alone, the other parties of the suit have neither consented nor would it be in their interest to agree for the alienation of the properties. Therefore, notwithstanding the consent or approval for alienation of the properties by one party, I do not think it is a fit case for allowing the said application. On considering the affidavit filed in support of the application, no reasons are forthcoming as to why the Court should permit his half-share in the properties to be sold. Moreover, he claims his half share based on the deed of partition dated 30.04.2002 which is sought to be questioned by the plaintiff in the present suit. Under these circumstances, it would not be appropriate to permit defendant No. 3 to alienate the properties mentioned in the application. I do not find any error committed by the Trial Court that calls for interference by this Court. The alienation at this stage would be harmful. Hence, no merits in the Petition and accordingly, it is dismissed.