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

1991 Supreme(Ker) 155

PAREED PILLAY
Michayel Nadar – Appellant
Versus
Sreedharan Babu – Respondent


Judgment :-

Second defendant in O.S.390 of 1976 of the Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara is the appellant. Plaintiffs 1 to 3 filed the suit originally for declaration and partition. Subsequently it was amended for recovery of possession of plaintiffs' share also. The trial Court held that plaintiffs are entitled to recover possession of half share of the plaint schedule property with mesne profits. This finding has been confirmed by the Sub Judge, Trivandrum. While confirming the preliminary decree the second defendant was allowed reimbursement of Rs.100/- spent by him for taking Ext.B6 release deed.

2. The property originally belonged to Kumaran Panicker who gifted the same in 1123 M.E. to his children viz. plaintiffs' mother, first defendant, Kamalakshi and Bhavani. Plaintiffs' mother purchased 1/4 share of the first defendant. She thus became entitled to half share in the property. Second defendant purchased the rights of Kamalakshi and Bhavani and obtained half right in the property. Third defendant who is the sister of the plaintiffs' mother executed a document in favour of the second defendant assigning rights of the plaintiffs in the property. This is challenged by the plaintiff







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