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

1988 Supreme(Ker) 167

PAREED PILLAY
PATHUMMA – Appellant
Versus
VEERASHA – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Plaintiff it the appellant. She filed the suit, for partition claiming 7/80 shares in the suit properties. The Sub Judge, Manjeri granted a preliminary decree for partition as prayed for by the plaintiff. Defendants filed A. S.25 of 1980 before the District Court, Manjeri. The learned District Judge allowed the appeal and non-suited the plaintiff.

2. Plaintiff is the sister of defendants 1 to 4. 5th defendant is her sister and 6th defendant is her mother. The properties belonged to deceased Muhammed, father of plaintiff and defendants 1 to 5. It is the case of the plaintiff that after the death of her father the properties devolved on her and other legal heirs and that they continued to be in joint possession of the properties. As against the plaintiff's claim for partition defendants contended that plaintiff's cannot claim any right to the properties as she had already assigned her rights in the properties to the second defendant on 2-10-1964 for valuable consideration. Defendants contended that the properties were later partitioned by them as per a registered partition deed dated 13-11-1978 and that they are in separate possession of the same.

3. Defendants very much








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