Skip to content


Ananta Ramappa and anr. Vs. Subraya and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1915Mad171; 29Ind.Cas.245
AppellantAnanta Ramappa and anr.
RespondentSubraya and anr.
Cases ReferredNarsingh Narain Singh v. Harkhu Singh
Excerpt:
civil procedure code (act v of 1908), order xxvi, rule 14 - partition decree--execution--division by casting lots legating of--equitable rule. - 1. we see no reason to interfere with the order of the district judge. we are not prepared to follow the decision in narsingh narain singh v. harkhu singh 8 c.l.j. 521 if it intends to lay down that the casting of lots for the purpose of allotting shares to the parties is opposed to order xxvi, rule 14. we think the most equitable way by which properties could be assigned to co-parceners will be to draw lots after dividing the properties with reference to the number of sharers. that has been done in this case and we find no justification for holding that that procedure is unwarranted or illegal.2. the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Judgment:

1. We see no reason to interfere with the order of the District Judge. We are not prepared to follow the decision in Narsingh Narain Singh v. Harkhu Singh 8 C.L.J. 521 if it intends to lay down that the casting of lots for the purpose of allotting shares to the parties is opposed to Order XXVI, Rule 14. We think the most equitable way by which properties could be assigned to co-parceners will be to draw lots after dividing the properties with reference to the number of sharers. That has been done in this case and we find no justification for holding that that procedure is unwarranted or illegal.

2. The appeal is dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //