1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO.  1809 OF 2006

VASUDEVAN EMBRANTHIRI  @ VASUDEVA RAO (DEAD) BY LRS. Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS

GOPALAKRISHNAN (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS.       Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. This  appeal  has  a  chequered  history  of

litigation, which commenced in the year 1984.  The

first  respondent  herein  filed  an  application  for

letters of administration, being LAOP No. 306 of 1984

and on contest, the same was converted in a suit.

The suit was dismissed.  The decree was reversed by

the  High  Court  and  thus  aggrieved,  the  legal

representatives  of  the  first  defendant,  are  before

this Court.

2. Several  attempts  have  been  made  to  find  an

amicable solution.  We find that the attempts could

not  converge  for  a  settlement  because  of  minor

differences.  Therefore, we directed both the parties

to  submit their  proposals for  a settlement  with a

plan.

2

3. Today,  when  the  matter  was  taken  up,  the

appellants  have  produced  a  statement  along  with  a

sketch.   The  respondents  have  also  produced  a

statement  and  a  sketch.   Obviously,  both  do  not

tally.

4. We  have  heard  Mr.  Thomas  P.  Joseph,  learned

senior  counsel,  assisted  by  Mr.  Paul  Kuriakose,

learned  counsel,  appearing  for  the  appellants  and

Mr.A.Raghunath,  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the

respondents.

5. A well meaning relative of both sides, namely one

Mr. Pradeep, is also present in Court today.

6. Looking at the facts of the case, it will be in

the interest of all to put a quietus to the three-

decade  long  litigation.   Having  gone  through  the

entire pleadings and having regard to the background

of the case and for doing complete justice between

the parties, we are of the view that it would be

just,  fair,  reasonable  and  equitable  to  have  the

properties divided in terms of the sketch prepared by

Mr. C. K. Venu and as produced by the respondents.

We make it clear that this Judgment is passed despite

3

the vehement objections advanced by the appellants,

for  doing  complete  justice  between  the  parties  in

exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the

Constitution of India.

7. Accordingly, the sketches of the plots prepared

by Mr. C. K. Venu and the statement filed along with

sketches are taken on record.  The same shall form

part of the decree.  This appeal is disposed of in

terms of the division of the properties as proposed

in the sketches prepared by Mr. C. K. Venu and the

statement attached along with it with regard to the

division.   Needless  to  say  that  the  two  Wills

(Exhibit A1 & B1) will stand superseded.  This decree

will be the source of title to the properties of the

respective sharers.  The trial court is directed to

send  a  copy  of  this  decree  to  the  Sub-Registrar

concerned for the purpose of entry in the official

records of the Sub-Registrar.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ A.M. KHANWILKAR ]  

New Delhi; October 25, 2018.