2025:KER:25630 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 4TH CHAITHRA, 1947 OP(C) NO. 1569 OF 2016 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.04.2016 IN OS NO.248 OF 1975 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THALIPARAMBA PETITIONER/PETITIONER: ACHUTHAN AGED 71 YEARS S/O. CHEMMARATHI AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 BY ADV SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 DEVAKI W/O. LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 2 GIRIJA D/O. LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 3 GIREESHAN S/O.LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 2 2025:KER:25630 KANNUR 670 142 4 GOPI S/O. LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 5 GEETHA D/O.LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 6 BEENA D/O. LATE THAIKKOL GOVINDAN, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 7 NARAYANI D/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 8 KOUSALYA D/O. LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 9 SOUMINI D/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 0 RADHA D/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 11 LEELA D/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 3 2025:KER:25630 12 RAVEENDRAN S/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 13 ROHINI D/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 14 PANKAJAKSHAN S/O.LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 15 RATHEESAN S/O. LATE THAIKKOL PARU, AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, KOOVERI AMSOM, MANKARA DESOM, KANNUR 670 581 16 YESODA D/O.LATE THAIKKOL KALLYANI, AGED 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 17 MADHAVI D/O. LATE THAIKKOL KALLYANI, AGED 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 18 JANARDANAN S/O.LATE THAIKKOL KALLYANI, AGED 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 19 KARTHYAYANI W/O. THAIKKOOL KUNHOTHENAN, AGED 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 4 2025:KER:25630 0 SUJITHKUMAR S/O. THAIKKOT KUNHOTHENAN, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 21 SUNITHA D/O. THAIKKOL KUNHOTHENAN, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 22 SUJINI D/O. THAIKKOL KUNHOTHENAN, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 23 SUNILKUMAR S/O. THAIKKOL KUNHOTHENAN, AGED 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, PANNIYOOR AMSOM, POOMANGALAM DESOM, KANNUR 670 142 24 UPPERI LAKSHMI W/O. THAIKKOL KUMARAN, AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, ANDOOR AMSOM, NANICHERI DESOM, KANNUR 670 563 25 PUSHPAJAKSHAN S/O. THAIKKOL KUMARAN, AGED 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, ANDOOR AMSOM, NANICHERI DESOM, KANNUR 670 563 26 HYMAVATHIDO. THAIKKOL KUMARAN AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, ANDOOR AMSOM, NANICHERI DESOM, KANNUR 670 563 27 PRASANNAKUMARI D/O. THAIKKOL KUMARAN, AGED 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKKOL, ANDOOR AMSOM, NANICHERI DESOM, KANNUR 670 563 O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 5 2025:KER:25630 BY ADV SRI.G.GIREESH THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 6 2025:KER:25630 JUDGMENT Dated this the 25th day of March, 2025 The petitioner is the 6th defendant in OS No.248/1975. He preferred Ext.P1 application before the Munsiff Court, Taliparamba, for permitting him to remit the Court Fee which is necessary for allotting his shares in the final decree of a partition suit. 2. The application was submitted after the delay of 37 years from the date of passing the decree. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner guided me through the judgment passed by this Court in OP(C) No.1570 of 2016, which is also arising from the same suit. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner in the said case was one of the legal heirs of 5th defendant and he also omitted to pay the required fee at the appropriate stage and this Court has permitted him to pay the court fee. The judgment reads as follows; The original petition is filed to set aside the order dated 11.04.2016 in IA No.2535/2015 in IA No.1038/1976 in OS No.248/1975 of the Court of the Munsiff, Taliparamba. 2. The petitioner and the respondents 1 to 4 in the original petition are the legal heirs of the 5th O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 7 2025:KER:25630 respondent in IA No.1038/1976. As per Exhibit C2 commission report that was filed in the final decree application, the deceased 5th respondent – predecessor in interest of the petitioner and the respondents 1 to 4 were allotted plot B in the plaint schedule property. However, when the final decree was prepared, the plot ‘B’ has been omitted to be mentioned. Accordingly, the petitioner had filed IA No.2535/2015 to correct the final decree. But, the court below has by the impugned Exhibit P2 order dismissed 2022:KER:28980 OP(C) NO. 1570 OF 2016 6 the application on the ground that it cannot be ascertained whether there has been an accidental omission or whether plot ‘B’ has been avoided on any finding. Exhibit P2 order is erroneous and wrong. Hence the original petition. 3. Heard Sri. Mathew Kuriakose, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even though service of notice is complete on the respondents, there is no appearance for them. 4. On a perusal of Exhibit P2 impugned order, it is evident that, as per Exhibit C2 commission report, the Advocate Commissioner has clearly suggested that plot ‘B’ to be allotted to the predecessor in interest of the petitioner and respondents 1 to 4 – the 5th respondent in the final decree application. Nevertheless, when the final decree was prepared, the said plot has been omitted to be included in the final decree. Even though Exhibit P1 O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 8 2025:KER:25630 application was filed, and the respondents in the application reporting that they had no objection in the 2022:KER:28980 OP(C) NO. 1570 OF 2016 7 application being allowed, the execution court has dismissed the same. 5. On a consideration of the pleadings and materials on record, I find that the mistake has been committed by the court below. The mistake of the court below cannot prejudice the petitioner and the respondent 1 to 4, who cannot be left remediless. Therefore, I hold that Exhibit P1 application is to be allowed, by directing the court below to correct the error in the final decree, in the light of Exhibit C2 commission report, otherwise, it would cause severe prejudice to the petitioner and the respondents 1 to 4. In the result, in exercise of the supervisory powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I set aside Exhibit P2 order and allow Exhibit P1 application. The court below is directed to correct the decree by including plot ‘B’ on the basis of Exhibit C2 in the amended decree. The amended decree shall be issued to the petitioner in accordance with law, as 2022:KER:28980 OP(C) NO. 1570 OF 2016 8 expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As this Court has already permitted a similar request O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 9 2025:KER:25630 made by the another defendant, this petition can also be allowed, in the same lines. Therefore, the Original Petition is allowed. The Ext.P2 order is setaside and thereby Ext.P1 application is allowed. The learned Munsiff, Taliparamb, is directed to modify the decree by including plot C in Ext.C2 and and Plot C in Ext.C6, in the amended decree. The amended decree shall be issued to the petitioner in accordance with law. Sd/- P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JUDGE HKH/25.03.2025 O.P.(C)No.1569/2016 10 2025:KER:25630 APPENDIX OF OP(C) 1569/2016 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION, DATED 22- 09-2015 IN IA NO 2534/2015 IN I.A NO 1038 OF 1976 IN O.S NO 248 OF 1975 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, TALIPARAMBA EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11-04-2016 IN I.A NO 2534/2015 IN I.A NO 1038 OF 1976 IN O.S NO 248 OF 1975 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, TALIPARAMBA