Case Summary
The case involves a dispute over ownership of a property where the plaintiffs allege that the defendants trespassed upon it. The plaintiffs sought to reopen evidence to produce documents supporting their claims.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court dismissed the petition for reopening evidence. Parties shall bear their respective costs.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the reasons given by the petitioners for reopening evidence were not valid and sufficient.
The court found that the reasons given by the petitioners for reopening evidence were not valid and sufficient.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the reasons given by the petitioners for reopening evidence were not valid and sufficient.
The court found that the reasons given by the petitioners for reopening evidence were not valid and sufficient.
Supporting Evidence
The contention of the petitioner that she was unaware of the field registers till this time and only got information about the same from an unnamed surveyor is not a valid and sufficient reason so as to invoke the inherent power under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the petition is dismissed. Parties shall bear their respective costs.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Divakaran
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Chandrika
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sheela Vincent
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Remla Chrispan
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kala Manohar
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Beela.L
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri.V.Suresh
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V.K.Radhakrishnan Nair
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The petitioners sought to reopen evidence to produce field registers.
Evidence:
the petition is dismissed
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Delivery Report
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The delivery report was mentioned as part of the evidence in a related case.
Reference:
Ext B2
Document Type:
Field Registers
Submitted By:
Unknown
Relevance:
Field registers maintained by the government were claimed to be relevant for deciding the case.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
1998