A.HARIPRASAD
Kerala State Represented By the Chief Secretary, Trivandrum – Appellant
Versus
Brijit – Respondent
State of Kerala and its officers are the appellants. They are the defendants in a suit filed by the original respondents seeking a declaration of title to the plaint schedule property and also for a perpetual injunction. In the first court, the plaintiffs lost. They went in appeal before the lower appellate court. The appellate court reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court and the suit was decreed declaring title of the plaintiffs over the plaint schedule property and prohibiting the defendants from trespassing into the plaint schedule property, demolishing a building thereon and doing any act adversely affecting the title and possession of the plaintiffs.
2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the relevant pleadings are thus: Plaint schedule property along with a larger extent belonged to Karintholil Lucka Thomman. It was devolved on him by virtue of a registered partition deed of the year 1110 ME. He assigned the property to the 1st plaintiff (his daughter-in-law) in the year 1978 as per Ext.A1 document. Plaint schedule land is part of item No.3 in Ext.A1. 2nd plaintiff was the husband of 1st plaintiff. Plaintiffs possessed the property and they were cultivating t
Dagadabai (dead) by L.Rs. v. Abbas @ Gulab Rustum Pinjari
Firm Srinivas Ram v. Mahabir Prasad
Kshitish Chandra Bose v. Commissioner of Ranchi
Mohan Lal v. Mirza Abdul Gaffar
N. Varada Pillai v. Jeevarathnmml
Nair Service Society Ltd. v. K.C.Alexander and others
P.Lakshmi Reddy v. L.Lakshmi Reddy
Raman v. S.Devadasa Maller and others
Sri Bhagwan Singh v. Ram Basi Kuer
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.