Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
OS.No.134/2014

Case between Sathya Bhama et al vs Surendran et al regarding setting aside a sale deed

Court
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF (RCC)
Judge
Smt. Salini.B.
Order Date
2025-02-25
Duration
approximately-10 years 10 days
Case Code No.
134
Case Closed
Tue, 02/25/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

The plaintiff, Sathya Bhama, claims that the first defendant fraudulently obtained her property while she was suffering from a mental condition. The case seeks to set aside the sale deed executed in favor of Surendran, the first defendant.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The court declared the sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favor of the first defendant as null and void. The defendants were restrained from alienating the property.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
The sale deed is declared null and void and the defendants are permanently restrained from alienating the property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The court declared the sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favor of the first defendant as null and void. The defendants were restrained from alienating the property.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The plaintiff proved her mental incapacity and the fraudulent act by the first defendant.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The plaintiff proved her mental incapacity and the fraudulent act by the first defendant.
Supporting Evidence
The plaintiff was suffering from mental disease and had no capacity to execute a valid document. This was corroborated by medical evidence introduced during the case.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result, the suit is decreed with costs as per the following terms: It is hereby declared that the sale deed No.1264/2001 dated 19.04.2001 of Thiruvananthapuram SRO executed by the plaintiff and the joint owner in favour of the 1st defendant is null and void and hereby set aside.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Sathya Bhama
Party Age
77
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
C.Vijayan
Party Age
53
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Surendran
Party Age
51
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Usha
Party Age
48
Relation
D/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Suresh
Party Age
27
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Umesh
Party Age
26
Relation
S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Settlement Deed No:1324/1990, Certified Copy of the Sale deed No:1264/2001, Copy of Medical Certificate issued by Dr.V.S.Ajith, Original prescription issued by Dr. K. Ramachandran
Defendants Documents

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
Sri. S. Suresh Babu
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Declaration
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Declare the sale deed No.1264/2001 as null and void.
Evidence:
It is hereby declared that the sale deed No.1264/2001 dated 19.04.2001 of Thiruvananthapuram SRO executed by the plaintiff and the joint owner in favour of the 1st defendant is null and void and hereby set aside.
Relief Type: Permanent Injunction
Outcome: Granted
Description:
Permanently restrain defendants from alienating the property.
Evidence:
The defendants are hereby permanently restrained from alienating 1.5 cents of property comprised in plaint schedule property.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Certified Copy of Settlement Deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of the plaintiff's ownership and rights over the property.
Reference:
Ext.A1
Document Type: Certified copy of the Sale deed
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Evidence of the fraudulent transaction executed by the first defendant.
Reference:
Ext.A2
Document Type: Copy of Medical Certificate
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Establishes the plaintiff's mental condition affecting her capacity to execute documents.
Reference:
Ext.A3
Document Type: Original prescription
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Supports the claim of the plaintiff's ongoing mental health treatment.
Reference:
Ext.A4
Document Type: Original prescription
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
Further evidence of the plaintiff's mental health condition.
Reference:
Ext.A5

Case Classification

Case Type
Civil Suit
Category
Property and Possession Disputes
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Common Reasons
Fraudulent transaction
Case Code
OS.NO.
Case Code Year
2014

Quick Facts

Location
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
District
Thiruvananthapuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Thiruvananthapuram
Case Filed
Tue, 02/25/2014 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 02/25/2025 - 12:00
From
Sat, 02/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Fri, 02/28/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between R. Saroja vs Sivathanu @ Murugan et al regarding partition of plaint schedule properties.
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Sarathchandran Nair.J vs Government of India et al regarding boundary measurement and injunction
COURT OF ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF-III
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Nazarudeen. A vs Tom.D et al regarding suit for declaration, recovery of possession, and injunction
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won
Case between Aravindan Nair et al vs Ramachandran Nair et al regarding partition and permanent prohibitory injunction.
THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Defendant Won
Case between Ramesan vs Sujatha et al regarding partition of ancestral property.
COURT OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
Civil Suit Plaintiff Won