Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
Original Suit No.143/2015

Case between C.Lakshmi et al vs E.P.Velayudhan et al regarding partition and consequential injunction

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Sri. Vivek P.
Order Date
2025-03-15
Duration
approximately-10 years 1 month
Case Closed
Sat, 03/15/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, C.Lakshmi and others, are seeking partition of property originally owned by late Ichutty @ Imbichutty. The defendants are E.P.Velayudhan and others, who are claiming ancestral rights over the property.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The suit for partition was decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing them 7/16th shares of the property while the defendants receive 9/16th shares. A permanent prohibitory injunction was granted against the defendants from wasting the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Partition of property and a permanant injunction
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit for partition was decreed in favor of the plaintiffs, allowing them 7/16th shares of the property while the defendants receive 9/16th shares. A permanent prohibitory injunction was granted against the defendants from wasting the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs established joint ownership and possession of the property and countered the defendants' claim of adverse possession.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs established joint ownership and possession of the property and countered the defendants' claim of adverse possession.
Supporting Evidence
The preponderance of probability lies in favour of the plaintiffs that plaint B schedule property is in joint ownership and possession of the plaintiffs and the defendants.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed as follows: 1. That the plaint B schedule property shall be divided into 16 shares by metes and bounds. 7/16 shares shall be allotted jointly in favour of the plaintiffs and 9/16 shares shall be jointly allotted to the share of the defendants.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
C.Lakshmi
Party Age
79
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
C.Radha
Party Age
66
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
C.Bharathi
Party Age
62
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
C.Sivadasan
Party Age
70
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Imbichimalu @ Janaki
Party Age
96
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
E.P.Velayudhan
Party Age
82
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
E.P.Sivasankaran
Party Age
79
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ramadevi.V
Party Age
76
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Santha
Party Age
73
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
E.P.Saraswathi
Party Age
66
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Copy of Regd. lawyer notice, Reply of lawyer notice, Death certificate of Imbichutty
Defendants Documents
Land Tax Receipts, Certified copies of various deeds

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.K.K.Krishnakumar
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.N.K.Viswanathan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Smt.Sabitha.P
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Partition
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs are entitled to partition of plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
The upshot of the discussion above is that the preponderance of probability lies in favour of the plaintiffs that plaint B schedule property is in joint ownership and possession of the plaintiffs and the defendants.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
A relief of permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from committing any acts of waste in the B schedule property.
Evidence:
Hence I find that there is sufficient cause of action in favour of the plaintiffs for granting a relief of permanent prohibitory injunction as prayed for.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
A notice sent by the plaintiff's advocate to the defendants regarding partition.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Reply of Lawyer Notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Reply provided by the defendants to the plaintiff's notice.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Death Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the date of death of Imbichutty, relevant for inheritance matters.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B7
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B8
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B9
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B10
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B11
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B12
Document Type: Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Provides evidence of tax payments made for the property by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B13
Document Type: Release deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
A deed executed by various parties that is relevant for establishing property rights.
Reference:
Ext.B14
Document Type: Possessory Mortgage Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Proves property ownership by Thamutty(Sr) as relevant evidence in the case.
Reference:
Ext.B15
Document Type: Mortgage Release Deed
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
Releases mortgage in favor of Thamutty, providing historical context regarding property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.B16
Document Type: Receipt
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
A copy of receipt demonstrating transaction involving property that supports the defendant's claims.
Reference:
Ext.B17

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between C.Lakshmi et al vs E.P.Velayudhan et al regarding partition and consequential injunction
Case Code Year
Case between C.Lakshmi et al vs E.P.Velayudhan et al regarding partition and consequential injunction

Quick Facts

Location
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Sun, 03/15/2015 - 12:00
Case Closed
Sat, 03/15/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Mon, 03/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Narmadha et al vs Marakkath Lal regarding permanent injunction
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Malayil Balan vs Nikhil regarding injunction restraining trespass
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Koroth Sandhya vs Dr.K.P.Ravi et al regarding easement rights over plaint B schedule road.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Bineesh vs Thekkedath Sreenivasan Nair et al regarding declaration of right and injunction.
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between P.Premi et al vs M.Rijeesh et al regarding recovery of possession and consequential injunction.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE.
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won