This review petition has been filed by the 6th respondent . On 5.7.2013 this court passed a preliminary decree for partition. The main grounds on which the review is sought for is that the finding of the court with regard to the plea of res judicata is not proper and that the court did not consider the contention that the review petitioner is entitled to indemnity. 2. Heard.
3. The judgment shows that the plea of res judicata has been considered by this court. The finding may be correct or not. It cannot be considered in the review petition.
4. The trial court turned down the claims of the review petitioner that he is entitled to indemnity and that proceedings may be initiated under Order 8A of the Code of Civil Procedure. But in the appeal the matter was not agitated. So it has become final.
5. But I find that there are some defects in the preliminary decree. The share of all the co-owners has not been declared. So the preliminary decree will have to be modified.
In the result, this review petition is allowed in part. But the modified preliminary decree is passed as follows:
a) Plaint A schedule property will be divided by mets and R.P.No.318 of 2014 in 2 A.S.No.27 of 2000 bounds into 36.
b) The plaintiffs together are entitled to 22 shares and the first and second defendants are entitled to 7 share each.
c) The plaintiff will be put in possession of their separate share.
d) The equities will be worked out in the final decree proceedings.
The suit is adjourned sine die.
cms /True copy/ Sd/-
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE P.S.to Judge