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

2011 Supreme(Ker) 108

C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, B.P.RAY
T. Sudheer – Appellant
Versus
M. V. Susheela – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:George Poonthottam, Advocate.
For the Respondents: No Appearance.

Judgment :-

Ramachandran Nair, J.

1. The contesting parties claiming management of a School, are appellants in the connected Writ Appeals filed challenging the very same judgment of the learned Single Judge.

2. We have heard Shri.George Poonthottam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.88/2011, Shri.S.Sreekumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in W.A.No.101/2011, and learned Government Pleader for the State and Educational Agencies.

3. The facts that led to the dispute are the following:-

One Shri.Appukutty established a Lower Primary School in the year 1936 and eversince he continued as it's Manager. The School was later upgraded as an Upper Primary School. In the year 1952 Shri.Appukutty executed a gift deed gifting the entire properties including the land in which the School buildings are constructed, in favour of his wife and two minor sons. Later wife of Shri.Appukutty executed release deed releasing her rights in favour of two sons. Thereafter in the year 1983 a partition deed was executed between the joint owners of the property, namely the two sons of Shri.Appukutty, whereunder the land and School buildings and improvements thereof were assign







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