Case Summary
The plaintiffs, including Saliha Beevi and Muhammad Ismayil, are seeking to cancel a document which they allege was executed through a forged power of attorney. The defendants oppose the suit, claiming that the petitions are not maintainable.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court allowed the petitions to condone a 500-day delay and ordered the necessary documents to be sent for expert analysis, ensuring fair adjudication.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court recognized the necessity to rectify a mistake on the face of records regarding the documents to be sent for expert analysis.
The court recognized the necessity to rectify a mistake on the face of records regarding the documents to be sent for expert analysis.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The only documents available to cross check the signatures to disprove the execution of power of attorney is the thumb impression register and the filing sheet available in the SRO.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, these petitions stands allowed.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Saliha Beevi
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Muhammad Ismayil
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mahaboob Subuhani
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Abdul Rasheed
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Mahadi
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vargheese P J
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Renju P Varghese @ Jacob
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Paul P Varghese
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mathew P Varghese
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Jolly Varghese
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Documents related to the execution of the power of attorney and signatures for analysis.
Defendants Documents
Not mentioned
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- G Santhosh Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- P T Geevarghese
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
The court allowed the petitions to condone the delay and made corrections to the previous order regarding documents to be sent for expert analysis.
Evidence:
Hence, to rectify the mistakes happened in the order passed by this court, the delay of 500 days is hereby condoned and petitions are allowed by reviewing the order to the effect that, instead of the direction to sent those documents to expert analysis to ensure fair adjudication.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was the subject of the suit for cancellation due to allegations of forgery.
Reference:
No. 5286/1981
Document Type:
Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was also mentioned in the context of the review petition for cancellation.
Reference:
No. 4553/1921
Document Type:
Thumb Impression Register
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
This was requested to cross-check the signatures in relation to the disputed power of attorney.
Reference:
SRO, Perumbavoor
Document Type:
Filing Sheets
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
These were also required for expert analysis to verify signatures.
Reference:
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Testimonies related to the authenticity and execution of the power of attorney.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Ernakulam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kolenchery
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Saliha Beevi et al vs Vargheese P J et al regarding cancellation of document
Case Code Year
Case between Saliha Beevi et al vs Vargheese P J et al regarding cancellation of document