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

1982 Supreme(Ker) 206

KADER
ALICE – Appellant
Versus
THOMMEN – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. This revision filed by the plaintiffs arises from an order passed on I. A. No. 1616/82 in O. S.411/82 on the file of the H Addl. Munsiff's Court. Ernakulam. The plaintiffs are residing in a plot of 10 cents situated in Kontbu-ruthy. It is said that the property of the plaintiffs is enclosed by compound walls on all the four sides The defendants 1 and 2 are residing in the property lying adjacent to the plaintiff's property on the south. It is said that there is a private pathway about 20 feet wide proceeding northwards from Konthuruthy Church Road running along the eastern boundary upto the northern boundary of the property of defendants 1 and 2 and thereafter this pathway turns to the east. According to the plaintiffs, as they had no access to the pathway from their property they purchased the plaint schedule item lying adjacent on their eastern compound wall under a sale deed dated 7-2-1981. The plaint schedule item is said to be a small strip of land having width of 6 links and a length of 105 links. The plaintiffs allege that ever since they purchased the plaint schedule item they have been using it as the only way to their house from the private pathway referred










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