Case Summary
The case involves a dispute among Poonattil Krishnan's children regarding the partition of ancestral property. Plaintiffs Rajan, Sreenivasan, and Chandrasekharan claim their right to shares in the property against their siblings and a supplemental defendant.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Preliminary decree for partition
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court decreed the suit for partition and outlined the shares of the plaintiffs and defendants in the ancestral property. The plaintiffs are awarded specific shares in relation to two items of property, with the remaining shares allocated to the defendants.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved their case with cogent and reliable evidence showing entitlement to shares in the ancestral property.
The plaintiff proved their case with cogent and reliable evidence showing entitlement to shares in the ancestral property.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved their case with cogent and reliable evidence showing entitlement to shares in the ancestral property.
The plaintiff proved their case with cogent and reliable evidence showing entitlement to shares in the ancestral property.
Supporting Evidence
Since the defendants remained exparte, the evidence adduced by the plaintiff remained unchallenged. I find no reason to disbelieve PW1. Therefore, I am satisfied that the plaintiff has proved his case by adducing cogent and reliable evidence.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed and a preliminary decree for partition is passed as follows: 1. The item No. 1 and 2 in the plaint B schedule property shall be divided into 7 equal shares and C and D schedule properties shall be divided into 10 equal shares by metes and bounds.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rajan
- Party Age
- 55
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sreenivasan
- Party Age
- 45
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Chandrasekharan
- Party Age
- 42
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Chinnammu
- Party Age
- 59
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Karthiayani
- Party Age
- 57
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kandar @ Krishnan
- Party Age
- 65
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vasudevan
- Party Age
- 48
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sarojini
- Party Age
- 67
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Udaya
- Party Age
- 26
- Relation
- D/o. Deceased Gangadharan
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ammadkkanakath Yoonus
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o. Hameed
Plaintiffs Documents
A1. 12-06-1975 Partition Deed, A2. 18-12-1989 Jenm Assignment Deed, A3. 30-11-1989 Partition Deed, A4. 24-05-2014 Lawyer Notice with postal receipt, A5. Postal Acknowledgment Card.
Defendants Documents
C1. 16-07-2015 Commission Report, C2. 16-07-2015 Plan.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. C. Nandakumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M.K.Moosakutty
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Soumya K.P.
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiffs are entitled to shares in the property as specified.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed and a preliminary decree for partition is passed as follows: The item No. 1 and 2 in the plaint B schedule property shall be divided into 7 equal shares and C and D schedule properties shall be divided into 10 equal shares by metes and bounds.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to the partition of property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Jenm Assignment Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document related to the assignment of property rights.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Partition Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document that outlines the partition of property.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent to the defendant demanding partition.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type:
Postal Acknowledgment Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment related to the notice sent to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type:
Commission Report
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner inspecting the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type:
Plan
Submitted By:
Court
Relevance:
Sketch related to the commission report for the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Poonattil Krishnan's Children vs Poonattil Krishnan's Children regarding Partition
Case Code Year
Case between Poonattil Krishnan's Children vs Poonattil Krishnan's Children regarding Partition