Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
ORIGINAL SUIT No. 588/2015

Case between Narangali Baburaj et al vs N. Sasidharan et al regarding partition

Court
Court of the Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Judge
Smt. Savitha T.P
Order Date
2025-07-23
Duration
approximately-10 years
Case Closed

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiffs, Narangali Baburaj, Narangali Hariharan, Girija, Geetha, and Sudha, are seeking a partition of property against the defendant N. Sasidharan. The case involves the division of inherited property among the family members.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court passed a preliminary decree for partition of the property among the plaintiffs and the defendant. The property will be divided into equal shares as determined by the court.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Property shall be divided into 60 equal shares.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court passed a preliminary decree for partition of the property among the plaintiffs and the defendant. The property will be divided into equal shares as determined by the court.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaint schedule property is partible and should be divided equally.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaint schedule property is partible and should be divided equally.
Supporting Evidence
On the basis of above pleadings, issues were framed which were recast as follows: 1.Whether the suit is bad for non joinder of necessary parties? 2.Whether plaint schedule property is partible?

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, preliminary decree is passed as follows: 1. Plaint schedule property shall be divided into 60 equal shares and 5/60 share shall be allotted to each plaintiffs.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Narangali Baburaj
Party Age
55
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Narangali Hariharan
Party Age
48
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Girija
Party Age
57
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Geetha
Party Age
50
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sudha
Party Age
45
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
N. Sasidharan
Party Age
60
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Vimala
Party Age
75
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Yamuna
Party Age
62
Relation
W/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Prabeesh
Party Age
35
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Prabitha
Party Age
33
Relation
D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. E.M. Vijayan
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sri. Sunilkumar Basu
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The plaintiffs and the defendant are entitled to respective shares of the plaint schedule property.
Evidence:
Plaint schedule property shall be divided into 60 equal shares and 5/60 share shall be allotted to each plaintiffs.
Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The 1st defendant is granted a share in the property upon payment of court fees.
Evidence:
Out of the remaining shares 17/60 share shall be allotted to 1st defendant on his payment of court fee.
Relief Type: Possession
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Shares will be allotted to supplemental defendants based on their claims and payments of court fees.
Evidence:
1/60 share each shall be allotted to supplemental defendants No.3 to 5 and 9 to 11 and 3/60 shares each shall be allotted to supplemental defendants 6, 7, 8 and 12 on payment of court fee.
Relief Type: Other
Outcome: Not Decided
Description:
Reservation of property after valuation will be decided at the final decree stage.
Evidence:
The question of reservation after valuing the property, if any, will be decided at the stage of final decree.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Partition Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document provided evidence of the shares of the property and the rights of the parties involved as per the deed of partition.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Court Order
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
This is the court order detailing the judgment and decisions made regarding the partition of the property.
Reference:
Ext.C1

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 Narangali Baburaj et al vs N. Sasidharan et al regarding partition
Case Code Year
Case between Narangali Baburaj et al vs N. Sasidharan et al regarding partition

Quick Facts

Location
Kozhikode
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Case Filed
Thu, 01/01/2015 - 12:00
Case Closed
From
Sun, 06/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Sun, 08/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
85%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between P.A.Sajeed vs Muhammed Shihab regarding mandatory injunction and damages
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Sadasivan et al vs Valiyedath Subhadra et al regarding partition
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF -II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Plaintiff 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
Case between Padmini vs Yasodha P regarding perpetual prohibitory injunction
Munsiff-II, Kozhikode
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Girish .M vs Sreenivasan.M et al regarding partition of property
MUNSIFF-II, KOZHIKODE
Civil Suit Defendant Won