Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No.440/2023

Case between Elias Puthiya Panthakalakam vs Kamabi Puthiya Panthakalakam et al regarding declaration and recovery of possession.

Court
THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I
Judge
Smt.Meera John K
Order Date
2025-11-13
Duration
approximately-3 years 11 months
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

Elias Puthiya Panthakalakam is the plaintiff seeking a declaration and recovery of possession of property gifted to him by his mother, Kamabi Puthiya Panthakalakam. The defendants are members of the plaintiff's family who dispute the validity of the gift.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court declared that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property, which had been orally gifted to him by the 1st defendant. The defendants were ordered to vacate the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is declared the absolute owner and defendants 3 and 4 are directed to surrender the vacant possession of the plaint schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court declared that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property, which had been orally gifted to him by the 1st defendant. The defendants were ordered to vacate the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The gift made by the 1st defendant to the plaintiff was found to be valid and fully executed.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The gift made by the 1st defendant to the plaintiff was found to be valid and fully executed.
Supporting Evidence
The evidence of PW1 and Exts. A1 to A5 would show that the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1. It is declared that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the oral gift made by the 1st defendant in favour of the plaintiff on the 20th day of December 2021.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Elias Puthiya Panthakalakam
Party Age
54
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kamabi Puthiya Panthakalakam
Party Age
83
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Raziya
Party Age
66
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Salih Baramy PP
Party Age
65
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
PP Abdul Jaleel Baramy
Party Age
64
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Marjana PP
Party Age
61
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Joint Release deed bearing document No. 1934/1975, Purchase certificate bearing no.5080/1976, Purchase certificate bearing No.3118/1978, Plan and permit issued by the Kozhikode Corporation, Survey sketch prepared by licensed Surveyor Muhammed Shafi.
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Muneer Ahammed
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.Mudasser Ahammed
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Anoop Chandran
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
It is declared that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the oral gift made by the 1st defendant in favour of the plaintiff on the 20th day of December 2021.
Evidence:
In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as follows: 1.It is declared that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the plaint schedule property by virtue of the oral gift made by the 1st defendant in favour of the plaintiff on the 20th day of December 2021.
Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Defendants No. 3 and 4 are directed to surrender the vacant possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff by removing themselves within a period of two months.
Evidence:
2.Defendants No. 3 and 4 are directed to surrender the vacant possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff by removing themselves within a period of two months failing which the plaintiff can resort to process known to law.
Relief Type: Costs
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiff is entitled to receive the costs of the suit from the defendants.
Evidence:
3.The plaintiff is entitled to receive the costs of the suit from the defendants.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Joint Release Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original of Joint Release deed bearing document No. 1934/1975 of SRO Chalappuram.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Purchase Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original purchase certificate bearing no.5080/1976 issued by Kozhikode Land Tribunal.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Purchase Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Purchase certificate bearing No.3118/1978 issued by Kozhikode Land Tribunal.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Plan and Permit
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Plan and permit issued by the Kozhikode Corporation.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Survey Sketch
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Original Survey sketch prepared by licensed Surveyor Muhammed Shafi.
Reference:
Ext.A5

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Oral gift
Case Code
Case between Elias Puthiya Panthakalakam vs Kamabi Puthiya Panthakalakam et al regarding declaration and recovery of possession.
Case Code Year
Case between Elias Puthiya Panthakalakam vs Kamabi Puthiya Panthakalakam et al regarding declaration and recovery of possession.

Quick Facts

Location
KOZHIKODE
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Wed, 12/20/2023 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Wed, 10/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Girija vs Arunjith P et al regarding mandatory injunction and other connected reliefs.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Thottathil Pachukutty et al vs Thottathil Sulochana et al regarding recovery of possession of immovable property and mandatory injunction.
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Muraleedharan vs Premanandan et al regarding fixation of boundary and injunction
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Jose Antony vs K.D. Antony et al regarding declaration and consequential injunction.
IN THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Satheesh Charly vs The Calicut Cosmopolitan Club et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won