SC takes strong note of delay by trial courts in passing final decrees in partition lawsuits

In the same suit, the court should allow the concerned party to file an appropriate application for drawing up the final decree, the verdict stated.Needless to state that a lawsuit comes to an end only when a final decree is drawn, it said.Therefore, we direct the Trial Courts to list the matter for taking steps under...

The Supreme Court on Friday took strong exception to the delay on the part of the trial courts in initiating the final decree proceedings under the Civil Procedure Code while deciding partition lawsuits after awarding preliminary judgments.

A bench of Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Vikram Nath directed all trial courts in the country to start the process of passing the final decree just after the initial ones to avoid delay in justice delivery while dealing with the partition lawsuits.

''We are of the view that once a preliminary decree is passed by the Trial Court, the court should proceed with the case for drawing up the final decree suo motu. After passing of the preliminary decree, the Trial Court has to list the matter for taking steps under Order XX Rule 18 of the CPC.

''The courts should not adjourn the matter sine die, as has been done in the instant case. There is also no need to file a separate final decree proceeding. In the same suit, the court should allow the concerned party to file an appropriate application for drawing up the final decree,'' the verdict stated.

Needless to state that a lawsuit comes to an end only when a final decree is drawn, it said.

''Therefore, we direct the Trial Courts to list the matter for taking steps under... of the CPC (for passing the final decree) soon after passing of the preliminary decree for partition and separate possession of the property, suo motu (on its own) and without requiring initiation of any separate proceedings,'' the SC directed.

The apex court also directed its Registry to forward a copy of its judgement to the Registrar Generals of all high courts ''who in turn are directed to circulate the directions'' on immediate drawing up of final decrees after passing the preliminary ones in partition cases to avoid delay.

The trial courts, while deciding the partition lawsuits, first pass the preliminary decree which declares the rights or shares of the parties to the partition.

Once the shares of the parties have been declared in the preliminary decree, the final decree is awarded for determining the actual shares and the details of the properties after holding the inquiry and this takes an unusually very long time as it is left to the litigants to initiate the process before trial courts.

The directions were issued while deciding an appeal arising out of a partition suit in which the apex court held that the ''law presumes in favour of marriage and against concubinage'' if a man and woman cohabited for a long period and their son cannot be denied the shares in the ancestral properties.

The top court set aside a verdict of the Kerala High Court which had held that in case of lack of evidence of marriage, the ''illegitimate'' son of a man and woman, who had cohabited together, was not entitled to property rights in ancestral properties.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)