Case Summary
The plaintiff, Latha.K.V, is seeking partition of a property after the death of her father, Balan, which she claims is jointly owned by herself and the defendants. The defendants, including Thankam.K.V, dispute the legitimacy of the plaintiff's claims and assert that there is no property available for partition due to prior settlements.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Partial
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is entitled to get 1/5 share in the remaining extent of plaint B schedule property after excluding 3.56 cents of land conveyed to defendant No.4.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court partially decreed the suit, granting the plaintiff and defendants shares in the remaining extent of the plaint B schedule property after accounting for prior settlements. The plaintiff is entitled to 1/5 share of the property.
Key Reasoning:
The Ext.B1 Will was deemed not valid and genuine, allowing the suit for partition.
The Ext.B1 Will was deemed not valid and genuine, allowing the suit for partition.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The Ext.B1 Will was deemed not valid and genuine, allowing the suit for partition.
The Ext.B1 Will was deemed not valid and genuine, allowing the suit for partition.
Supporting Evidence
The Ext.B1 Will was not executed at the free will and volition of Balan, which allows the partition of the B schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed in part and a preliminary decree is passed as follows: 1. Plaintiff is entitled to get 1/5 share in the remaining extent of plaint B schedule property after excluding 3.56 cents of land conveyed to defendant No.4.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Latha.K.V
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Thankam.K.V
- Party Age
- 78
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sudhir Naduvalakandy
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Sunil Naduvalakandy
- Party Age
- 42
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Beena
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mythili
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- 2nd wife
Plaintiffs Documents
Settlement deed No. 327/2002 of SRO, Chalappuram(Certified copy)
Defendants Documents
Regd. Will No. 20/2014 of SRO, Chalappuram(Original), Internet payment receipt of property tax issued by Kozhikode Corporation, Land tax receipt, Agreement executed between P.M. Latha and Balan (Original), Land tax receipt, Death certificate of Balan.
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. M. Jayadeep
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- P.K. Praveena
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. Anooj Alanghatt
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. P.S. Sreedharan Pillai
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt. K. Ritha
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to get 1/5 share in the remaining extent of plaint B schedule property after excluding 3.56 cents that were conveyed to defendant No.4.
Evidence:
Therefore, it is found that the plaint B schedule property after deducting 3.56 cents of land is liable to be partitioned among plaintiff and defendant Nos’1 to 4 and plaintiff is entitled to get 1/5 share in the remaining plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant No.1 is entitled to get 1/5 share in the remaining extent of plaint B schedule property after excluding 3.56 cents that were conveyed to defendant No.4.
Evidence:
Defendant No.1 is also entitled for 1/5 share as she had paid court fee.
Relief Type:
Partition
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant Nos’2 to 4 are entitled to get 1/5 share each in the remaining extent of plaint B schedule property after excluding 3.56 cents that were conveyed to defendant No.4.
Evidence:
Defendant Nos’2 to 4 are entitled for 1/5 share each on payment of court fees.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Settlement Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The document is a certified copy of the settlement deed regarding the plaint B schedule property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Registered Will
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document is the registered will executed by Balan, which was challenged by the plaintiff regarding its validity.
Reference:
Ext.B1
Document Type:
Internet Payment Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document serves to show the payment of property tax by the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.B2
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document confirms the payment of land tax related to the property in question.
Reference:
Ext.B3
Document Type:
Agreement
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document is an agreement executed between P.M. Latha and Balan which was presented in support of the defendants' claims.
Reference:
Ext.B4
Document Type:
Land Tax Receipt
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document serves as another receipt for land tax payment.
Reference:
Ext.B5
Document Type:
Death Certificate
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
The document is the death certificate of Balan, which establishes the timing of his death regarding the claims made.
Reference:
Ext.B6
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Case Code
Case between Latha.K.V vs Thankam.K.V et al regarding partition of property
Case Code Year
Case between Latha.K.V vs Thankam.K.V et al regarding partition of property