Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
O.S.388/2020

Case between Kalarikandy Subash Babu (died), Durga Devi, Bindya, Sandya vs Kasthuri Bai, Ramani Bai regarding partition of property.

Court
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Judge
Sri.Vivek.P
Order Date
2025-01-31
Duration
approximately-1 year 5 months
Case Code No.
388
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This case involves a partition dispute over property following a preliminary decree. The plaintiffs are seeking to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to measure and divide the suit properties as decreed.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court accepted the Advocate Commissioner's report and passed a final decree for partition, allotting specific plots of land to the plaintiffs and defendants.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Final decree for partition and an equalisation payment of Rs.15,933.34 to the petitioners.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court accepted the Advocate Commissioner's report and passed a final decree for partition, allotting specific plots of land to the plaintiffs and defendants.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The court determined the Advocate Commissioner's report as reliable for the final decree.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The court determined the Advocate Commissioner's report as reliable for the final decree.
Supporting Evidence
The Commissioner reported that the plaint schedule property has an extent of 4.08 cents, which is a garden land with a house in it. Hence, I find that Exts.C1 and C2 are sufficient and reliable to pass a final decree in this case and hence it is accepted.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the final decree is passed as follows:- 1.That plot A in Ext. C2 plan lying in Re survey No.698/2 in Kalathinkunnu desom of Kasaba village of Kozhikode Taluk having an extent of 1.36 cents shall be allotted towards the share of the Petitioners jointly and the right, title and interest of the same shall vest with them and they can enjoy and possess the same as their own.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Durga Devi
Party Age
63
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Bindya
Party Age
38
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sandya
Party Age
36
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Kasthuri Bai
Party Age
73
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Ramani Bai
Party Age
69
Relation
W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Preliminary decree for partition dated 19.08.2023, Commissioner report with plan filed by Adv. Jyothi.R.
Defendants Documents
Counter filed stating the property is not partible.

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri.M.J.Sebastian
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.K.C.Raveendran Nair
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri.T.S.Sajith Kumar
Appearance Type
Assisting Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Final decree passed for partition of property between plaintiffs and defendants.
Evidence:
Hence, I find that Exts.C1 and C2 are sufficient and reliable to pass a final decree in this case and hence it is accepted.
Relief Type: Payment
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Respondents are directed to pay an equalization amount of Rs. 15,933.34/- to the petitioners.
Evidence:
That the respondents shall jointly pay an equalisation amount of Rs.15,933.34/- to the petitioners.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commission Report with Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Filed by Advocate Jyothi R to measure the decree schedule property and propose division.
Reference:
Ext.C1
Document Type: Survey Plan
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Prepared by M.K. Mohan Kumar, Surveyor, to illustrate the division of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C2
Document Type: Valuation report with plan and photos
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
Provided valuation details to support the division of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C3

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Other Civil Cases
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
O.S.
Case Code Year
2020

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode District
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 1 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Wed, 01/01/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
From
Wed, 01/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 01/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
80%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between Sulochana.K.V vs Lohithakshan et al regarding Petition for Reinstatement
THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Canara Bank vs M/S U.B. Hardwares regarding suit dismissal
COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sujith K.M. vs P. Chandramathi @ Chandrika et al regarding permanent prohibitory injunction
ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-I
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Panakkal Mammedkoya vs Fabir et al regarding partition
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF – I, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Moideen.V.P vs Pathumma et al regarding setting aside a final decree
COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF - I
Civil Suit Defendant Won