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

1989 Supreme(Ker) 515

S.PADMANABHAN
Bapputty (A) Sydali – Appellant
Versus
Cheriakutty (A) Veerankhani Rawther – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S. Padmanabhan, J.

1. A suit, merely for fixation of boundaries, was decreed by the trial court and the decision was confirmed in appeal. That is how the additional defendants came up in second appeal.

2. There are altogether 25 items in plaint A schedule and 19 items in B schedule. These and other items belonged in Kanam to Nooral Rawther, deceased father of plaintiff and first defendant. First defendant was the sole defendant when the suit was instituted. Rawther gifted A schedule and other items to plaintiff under Ext. A1 and B schedule and other items to the first defendant under Ext. A2 on the same day. A and B schedule items are the properties left after transfers in discharge of the debts mentioned in Exts.A1 and A2. Since there are ever so many pending litigations between the parties in respect of individual items included in Ext. A1 and A2, this suit for fixation of boundaries was filed solely to avoid future disputes and not because there is any existing boundary dispute. Additional defendants 2 to 7 are the children of the first defendant. They were impleaded on the contention of the first respondent that he gifted the properties to them. Maintainability of the sui






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