Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.545/1998

Case between Divakaran et al vs Sheela Vincent et al regarding reopening evidence and production of documents

Court
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-II
Judge
Smt. Sincy Jacob
Order Date
2025-07-23
Duration
approximately-27 years 4 months
Case Code No.
545
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The case involves a petition filed by the additional defendants seeking to reopen the evidence and produce additional documents. The plaintiffs are seeking to declare ownership and title over the plaint schedule property, claiming the defendants trespassed upon it.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The petition to reopen evidence and allow the production of additional documents was dismissed.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The petition to reopen evidence and allow the production of additional documents was dismissed.
Key Reasoning:
The court found that the reasons provided to reopen the evidence were insufficient and the petition was filed at a belated stage.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found that the reasons provided to reopen the evidence were insufficient and the petition was filed at a belated stage.
Supporting Evidence
The petition being filed at this belated stage for the purpose of producing the field registers is not liable to be allowed.

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: Rejected
Description:
The petition to reopen evidence and produce field registers was rejected.
Evidence:
the petition being filed at this belated stage for the purpose of producing the field registers is not liable to be allowed.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Delivery Report
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The court permitted the delivery report as admissible evidence without proof.
Reference:
Ext B2

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

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Thu, 03/05/1998 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Tue, 07/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Thu, 07/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Union Bank of India et al vs Midhun. M regarding rejection of plaint
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Purushothaman Pillay Divakaran et al vs Deepti Sivan regarding injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sreenath.S vs Thankarajan et al regarding dismissal of suit as not pressed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sindhu.S et al vs Lalitha et al regarding withdrawal of suit
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Vanitha Sureshbabu Thilak vs Babu Chettiyar et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won