OS. No. 210/2012

Case between M.S.Sasidharan et al vs Natarajan et al regarding partition and injunction

Court

Munsiff Court, Kollam

Judge

Smt. Sofia.T.A

Order Date

2025-11-15

Duration

approximately-13 years 6 months

Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs seek partition of property and an injunction against the defendants. Disputes arose over the ownership and entitlement to the property after the death of their father.

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Favored

Defendant

Relief Granted

Case Type

Civil Suit

Final Judgment

The court dismissed the suit and counter claim, stating the plaintiffs failed to prove their entitlement to partition.

Key Reasoning:
The plaintiffs could not establish their claim to partition the property.

Why Defendant Won:
The plaintiffs could not establish their claim to partition the property.

Supporting Evidence

The plaintiff has failed to prove his identity by adducing convincing evidence. In fact, the identity of the plaintiff with the suit remains unanswered.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit and counter-claim are dismissed. Considering nature and circumstances there is no order as to costs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: M.S.Sasidharan
Party Age: 69
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Karthika. C
Party Age: 71
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: S.K. Sasikala
Party Age: 52
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: S.K. Sasilekha
Party Age: 50
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: S.K. Sasikumary
Party Age: 48
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Natarajan
Party Age: 52
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Muraleedharan
Party Age: 46
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Thankamani
Party Age: 50
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Anil
Party Age: 29
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Anitha
Party Age: 25
Relation: D/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Gazette notification, Sale deed No. 2685/1117.

Defendants Documents

Judgment in OS 549/1997, Judgment in RFA no.12/2004.

Advocates

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Somasekharan Pillai. K.
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Dharmarajan. K.
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Jose Abraham
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sathyaraju
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Partition

Outcome: Refused

Description:

Plaintiff sought partition of his 10/18 share in property.

Evidence:

The court concluded that the plaintiff failed to prove his identity as a co-owner.

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction

Outcome: Refused

Description:

Plaintiff sought permanent injunction against defendants from committing waste.

Evidence:

Court found no basis for granting an injunction due to prior judgments.

Relief Type: Fixation of Boundary

Outcome: Granted

Description:

Defendants sought fixation of boundary for the counter claim property.

Evidence:

The court acknowledged the need for clear demarcation to separate properties.

Relief Type: Permanent Injunction

Outcome: Granted

Description:

Defendants sought injunction against plaintiff trespassing on counter claim property.

Evidence:

Court found merit in the injunction request to prevent possible trespass.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Gazette notification

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

This document establishes the plaintiff's name change from Ayyappan to M.S. Sasidharan.

Reference:

Ext.A1

Document Type: Sale deed

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

Evidence of the property's ownership by the plaintiff and his father.

Reference:

Ext.A2

Document Type: Gift Deed

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

It indicates the transfer of 35 cents of land to Narayanan and Govindan.

Reference:

Ext.A3

Document Type: Judgment

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

Judgment in OS 755/1987 relevant to the plaintiff's claim.

Reference:

Ext.A4

Document Type: Decree

Submitted By: Plaintiff

Relevance:

Decree from prior judgment reinforcing the property rights.

Reference:

Ext.A5

Document Type: Judgment

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Judgment in OS 549/1997 which dismissed the plaintiff's previous claim.

Reference:

Ext.B1

Document Type: Judgment

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Judgment in RFA no.12/2004 reinforcing the defendant's ownership.

Reference:

Ext.B2

Document Type: Decree

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Decree related to the RFA proceedings affirming defendant rights.

Reference:

Ext.B3

Document Type: Judgment

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Judgment in RSA no. 471/2011 regarding the ownership dispute.

Reference:

Ext.B4

Document Type: Settlement Deed

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Settlement deed transferring property rights to the defendant.

Reference:

Ext.B5

Document Type: Tax receipt

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Proof of the defendant's ownership through tax payments.

Reference:

Ext.B6

Document Type: Encumbrance certificate

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Certificate showing the property is free of encumbrances under the defendant's name.

Reference:

Ext.B7

Document Type: Gift Deed

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Details regarding the gift of land to Narayanan and Govindan.

Reference:

Ext.B8

Document Type: Release deed

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Documentation regarding release of rights.

Reference:

Ext.B9

Document Type: Judgment

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Judgment in OS 755/1987 relevant to claims over the property.

Reference:

Ext.B10

Document Type: Tax receipt

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Tax paid by the defendant on the property.

Reference:

Ext.B11

Document Type: Tax receipt

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Proof of tax payment on behalf of the property.

Reference:

Ext.B12

Document Type: Tax receipt

Submitted By: Defendant

Relevance:

Another proof of ongoing tax payments on the property.

Reference:

Ext.B13

Document Type: Commission Report

Submitted By: Court

Relevance:

Report by Advocate Commissioner regarding the property.

Reference:

Ext.C1

Case Classification

Case Type

Civil Suit

Case between M.S.Sasidharan et al vs Natarajan et al regarding partition and injunction

Judgement document from eCourt website

Case Summary

Judgment Outcome

Judgment Evidence:

Parties Involved

Parties

Advocates

Reliefs

Documents & Evidence

Case Classification

Quick Facts

Involved Entities

Similar Cases