Case Summary
The plaintiffs, Sadasivan and others, are seeking a partition of a property which they claim is co-owned with the defendants, Valiyedath Subhadra and others. The case revolves around the rights over a property originally belonging to their ancestor, Kunjipennu.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Preliminary decree for partition of property
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court found in favor of the plaintiffs, Sadasivan and others, granting a preliminary decree for partition of the property in question. The property will be divided into four equal shares, with the plaintiffs receiving two shares jointly.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim of ownership over the plaint schedule property, which was contested but not substantiated by the defendants.
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim of ownership over the plaint schedule property, which was contested but not substantiated by the defendants.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim of ownership over the plaint schedule property, which was contested but not substantiated by the defendants.
The plaintiffs provided sufficient evidence to prove their claim of ownership over the plaint schedule property, which was contested but not substantiated by the defendants.
Supporting Evidence
Considering the same, I am of the view that the defendants have failed to prove their case to show that 9.25 cents of land allotted to Krishnan and Santha was given as her due share by Kunjipennu during her lifetime.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, a preliminary decree is passed as follows: 1) That the plaint schedule property shall be divided into four equal shares and plaintiffs No.1 to 4 shall be allotted 2/4 share jointly.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sadasivan
- Party Age
- 56
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Santha
- Party Age
- 79
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Meena
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Padmini
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Valiyedath Subhadra
- Party Age
- 77
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- V.P.Rajan
- Party Age
- 40
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Prabhavas
- Party Age
- 87
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- V.P.Rathnamani
- Party Age
- 60
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- V.P.Chandran
- Party Age
- 50
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Kanam Deed No.1581/1939 of SRO, Feroke, Copy of lawyer notice
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri.E.M.Vijayan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Smt.Aswathi.K
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Possession
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
A preliminary decree for the partition of the plaint schedule property was granted.
Evidence:
Considering the same, it can safely be concluded that plaintiffs have proved their case and they are entitled to get the partition of plaint schedule property as sought for.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Kanam Deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document establishes the original ownership and division of the property involved in the partition.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type:
Lawyer Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This notice was sent to the defendant to initiate the partition process, demonstrating the plaintiff's intent to seek legal relief.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This receipt serves as proof of sending the lawyer notice to the defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2(a)
Document Type:
Postal Acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This acknowledgment indicates that the defendant received the lawyer notice.
Reference:
Ext.A2(b)
Document Type:
Oral Evidence
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Testimony from the defendant's side was provided through DW1 in support of their claim.
Reference:
Case Classification
Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Kozhikode
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court 2 Kozhikode
Common Reasons
Partition of property
Case Code
Case between Sadasivan et al vs Valiyedath Subhadra et al regarding partition
Case Code Year
Case between Sadasivan et al vs Valiyedath Subhadra et al regarding partition