SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Ker) 350

R.BHASKARAN, K.T.SANKARAN
Saramma Ittoop – Appellant
Versus
Kunjamma Kuruvilla – Respondent


Judgment :-

Sankaran, J.

Defendants 2,3 and 5 is O.S.No.223 of 1990 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge of Moovattupuzha, challenge the preliminary judgment and decree of the trial court by which the plaintiffs were held entitled to 2/10 shares in the plaint schedule property and 2/10 shares in the rent received in respect of the buildings and defendants 2 to 5 were restrained from causing any obstruction to the plaintiffs in taking water from the plaint schedule property. It was also provided in the preliminary decree that as far as possible, partition should be effected without affecting the residence of defendants 2 to 5.

2. The plaint schedule property and the building therein belonged to Ittoop Kurian. He was a bachelor. Ittoop Kurian has three brother and five sisters, namely, Varghese, Kurivilla, Ittoop, Annamma Chacko, Sosamma Uthup, Mariamma, Aleyamma and Saramma Kuriakose. The plaintiffs are the daughter and widow of Kuruvilla. Sosamma Uthup died and her legal representative are since deceased P.U. Ittop and the 11th defendant P.U. Mathew. The legal representatives of P.U. Ittoop are defendants 2 to 5. Defendants 6 to 9 are the legal representatives of Mariamma. D






































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top