Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 572 /2012

Case between E.S. Santhadevi et al vs Sarada et al regarding recovery of possession and declaration of property rights

Court
IN THE COURT OF THE MUNSIFF- II, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Smt. Jomy Anu Isaac
Order Date
2025-04-11
Duration
approximately-13 years 2 months
Case Closed
Fri, 04/11/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

E.S. Santhadevi and E.S. Maheshkumar, the plaintiffs, are seeking recovery of possession of property from the defendants, who include Sarada and others. The case revolves around property rights and alleged trespass by the defendants.

Judgment Outcome

Defendant Won
Interim Order
The suit is dismissed with costs for the defendants. The court upheld the defendants' claims to the property based on evidence presented.
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is dismissed with costs for the defendants. The court upheld the defendants' claims to the property based on evidence presented.
Key Reasoning:
The court found the evidence and claims of the defendants more credible in determining property boundaries.
Why Defendant Won:
The court found the evidence and claims of the defendants more credible in determining property boundaries.
Supporting Evidence
The court concluded that the measurements of the property were inaccurately described by the plaintiffs, impacting their claim.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is dismissed with costs of the defendants.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
E.S. Santhadevi
Party Age
65
Relation
W/o Late Sankaran Embranthiri
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
E.S. Maheshkumar
Party Age
39
Relation
S/o Late Sankaran Embranthiri
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sarada
Party Age
74
Relation
W/o Late Damodaran Chettiar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
V.K. Shoba
Party Age
52
Relation
D/o Late Damodaran Chettiar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
V.K. Shylaja
Party Age
50
Relation
D/o Late Damodaran Chettiar
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
V.K. Valsala
Party Age
48
Relation
W/o Sreedharan N.V
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Sivadasan
Party Age
47
Relation
S/o Late Damodaran Chettiar
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copies of various deeds and evidence of property ownership.
Defendants Documents
Certified copies of written statements and evidence related to property rights.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K.M. Muhammed Iqubal
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K.P. Gangadharan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
V.Satheesan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
P.C. Satheesh
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
V.P. Radhakrishnan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
K. Jayarajan
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Jaideepsingh
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Recovery
Outcome: Refused
Description:
The plaintiffs sought recovery of possession of plaint D schedule property from defendants.
Evidence:
In view of the findings in the issue Nos’1 to 6 and 8 to 23, it is found that the suit is only to be dismissed with the costs of the defendants.
Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a declaration that the partition deed 3910/2002 of SRO Feroke executed by defendants 1 to 6 is not binding on them.
Evidence:
It is found that the plaintiffs are not entitled for a declaration that the Ext.A58 partition deed is not binding upon them.
Relief Type: Injunction
Outcome: Refused
Description:
Plaintiffs sought a perpetual prohibitory injunction against defendants regarding plaint B and D schedule properties.
Evidence:
No relief of injunction can be granted as the evidence did not support the plaintiffs' claims.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Deed No. 1565/1942 of SRO, Feroke evidencing the original ownership of property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Kanam Deed No. 2063/1945 of SRO, Feroke evidencing the change of ownership of property.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Kanam Deed No. 4557/1946 of SRO, Feroke providing further evidence of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Deed No. 808/1972 of SRO, Feroke regarding property ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Deed No. 1968/1972 of SRO, Feroke providing evidence of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A5
Document Type: Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No.644/1975 of SRO, Feroke evidencing settlement of property.
Reference:
Ext.A6
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Commission report detailing the physical measurements and conditions of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Further commission report submitted by Advocate V.V. Pushpaveni on the property measurements.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Additional commission report detailing updated property measurements.
Reference:
Ext.C3
Document Type: Commission Report
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Another commission report submitted by Advocate V.V. Pushpaveni providing evidence on property boundaries.
Reference:
Ext.C4
Document Type: Purchase Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Purchase certificate in the name of Sankaran Embranthiri providing proof of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A8
Document Type: Purchase Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Certified copy of Purchase Certificate in the name of Santhadevi Antharjanam providing proof of ownership.
Reference:
Ext.A9

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Recovery of Possession
Case Code
Case between E.S. Santhadevi et al vs Sarada et al regarding recovery of possession and declaration of property rights
Case Code Year
Case between E.S. Santhadevi et al vs Sarada et al regarding recovery of possession and declaration of property rights

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Sun, 01/01/2012 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 04/11/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 03/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sat, 05/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Private Individual

Similar Cases

Case between Shibu vs R. Rajagopalakrishnan et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction.
Court of Additional Munsiff - II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Mohanan P.D vs The Manager, State Bank of India regarding declaration of valid title deed
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Anil. E. P vs Samastha Kerala Jam-Iyyathul Muallimeen Central Council regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
Additional Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between T.N. Devaki vs Padmanabhan Nair et al regarding setting aside the partition deed
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Lakshmikutty Amma et al vs Kozhikode City Service Co-operative Bank et al regarding declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction.
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won