Case Summary
The plaintiff, Vanaja Shanmughan, is seeking a partition of property that was previously owned by her mother and siblings. The defendants, who are related to the plaintiff, did not appear in court and were declared exparte.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Plaintiff is entitled to get 3/32 share in the plaint B schedule property.
Case Type
Civil Suit
Final Judgment
No
The suit is decreed with a preliminary decree stating the shares each party is entitled to in the property. The plaintiff is to receive 3/32 share, while the defendants are entitled to varying shares.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The unchallenged proof affidavit and evidence of the plaintiff shows that plaint B schedule property is partible.
The unchallenged proof affidavit and evidence of the plaintiff shows that plaint B schedule property is partible.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
The unchallenged proof affidavit and evidence of the plaintiff shows that plaint B schedule property is partible.
The unchallenged proof affidavit and evidence of the plaintiff shows that plaint B schedule property is partible.
Supporting Evidence
The unchallenged proof affidavit and evidence of the plaintiff shows that plaint B schedule property is partible and plaintiff is entitled to get shares as mentioned in the plaint over the plaint B schedule property.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed and a preliminary decree is passed as follows: 1.Plaintiff is entitled to get 3/32 share in the plaint B schedule property.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Vanaja Shanmughan
- Party Age
- 69
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Neelakandan
- Party Age
- 75
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Vasantha
- Party Age
- 73
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Rukmini
- Party Age
- 72
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Hemavathy Nagarajan
- Party Age
- 70
- Relation
- D/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Kokila
- Party Age
- 54
- Relation
- W/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of document No.213/1997 of SRO Meenchanda
Defendants Documents
Nil
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. N. Manoj
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff is entitled to get 3/32 share in the plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
In the result, suit is decreed and a preliminary decree is passed as follows: 1.Plaintiff is entitled to get 3/32 share in the plaint B schedule property.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant Nos’1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 are entitled to get 3/32 share each in plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
3.Defendant Nos’1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 are entitled to get 3/32 share each in plaint B schedule property on payment of court fees.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant Nos’6 and 7 are jointly entitled to get 3/32 share in plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
3.Defendant Nos’6 and 7 are jointly entitled to get 3/32 share in plaint B schedule property jointly on payment of court fees.
Relief Type:
Declaration
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Defendant No.8 is entitled to get 11/32 share in plaint B schedule property.
Evidence:
4.Defendant No.8 is entitled to get 11/32 share in plaint B schedule property on payment of court fees.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Plaintiff and defendants are entitled to get separate allotment of their share.
Evidence:
5.Plaintiff and defendants are entitled to get separate allotment of their share.
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Any of the parties can prefer an application to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to partition the plaint B schedule property by metes and bounds.
Evidence:
6.Any of the parties can prefer an application to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to partition the plaint B schedule property by metes and bounds.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certified copy of Janamam assignment deed
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
This document was marked in the court as evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim.
Reference:
Ext.A1
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 Vanaja Shanmughan vs Neelakandan et al regarding partition
Case Code Year
Case between Vanaja Shanmughan vs Neelakandan et al regarding partition