Case between Sarojini.K.P vs Vikraman et al regarding partition of property

Case Summary

The case involves a partition suit filed by Sarojini.K.P and her children against Vikraman and Viswambaran. The suit sought to divide the property originally belonging to their deceased father, Chellappan.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won

Interim Order

The court allowed the final decree application for the partition of property among the parties as per the mediation agreement. It detailed the property shares allocated to each party based on the agreement.

Judgment Favored

Plaintiff

Relief Granted

Case Type

Partition Suit

Final Judgment

No

The court allowed the final decree application for the partition of property among the parties as per the mediation agreement. It detailed the property shares allocated to each party based on the agreement.

Why Plaintiff Won:
The suit was decreed based on a mediation agreement that was accepted by all parties.

Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The suit was decreed based on a mediation agreement that was accepted by all parties.

Supporting Evidence

The court is satisfied that the advocate commissioner has effected partition in an equitable manner and on the basis of the preliminary decree.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, Final Decree application is allowed and final decree is passed as follows: (i) The plot shown with alphabets ‘DEFGHJTS’ to ‘D’ having an extent of 4 cents 522 sq. links is allotted to the 1st petitioner/1st defendant. (ii) The 2nd petitioner/2nd defendant is allotted with property shown with alphabets ‘ABCRU’ to ‘A’ having extent of 3 cents 756 sq. links.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Sarojini.K.P
Party Age: 60
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Aparna.C.S
Relation: D/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Arjun.S.S
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Plaintiff
Party Name: Geetha
Party Age: 57
Relation: W/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Vikraman
Party Age: 61
Relation: S/o

Party Role: Defendant
Party Name: Viswambaran
Party Age: 59
Relation: S/o

Plaintiffs Documents

Mediation agreement, Commission report

Defendants Documents

Not mentioned

Advocates

Party Role: Defendant
Advocate Name: Sri. Dil Mohan
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. Beyline Das.Y
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Party Role: Plaintiff
Advocate Name: Sri. Alex Babu Bunglowil
Appearance Type: Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Possession

Outcome: Granted

Description:

Final decree is passed for the parties to obtain their respective shares of the property.

Evidence:

In the result, Final Decree application is allowed and final decree is passed as follows: (i)The plot shown with alphabets ‘DEFGHJTS’ to ‘D’ having an extent of 4 cents 522 sq. links is allotted to the 1st petitioner/1st defendant. (ii) The 2nd petitioner/2nd defendant is allotted with property shown with alphabets ‘ABCRU’ to ‘A’ having extent of 3 cents 756 sq. links. (iii) The property shown with alphabets ‘CDSQRC’ having an extent of 2 cents 026 sq. links is allotted to 3rd defendant. (iv) The property shown with alphabets ‘JKLOPQST’ to ‘J’ having an extent of 3 cents 756 sq. links is allotted to plaintiffs.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Commission Report

Submitted By: Court

Relevance:

The commission report produced by the commissioner after measuring out the property in accordance with the plan attached to the preliminary decree is admitted in evidence.

Reference:

Ext.C1

Document Type: Survey Plan

Submitted By: Court

Relevance:

A survey plan prepared by both parties which forms part of the decree is marked as Ext.C1(a).

Reference:

Ext.C1(a)

Case Classification